HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03262024 - Complete Min PktMeeting Minutes
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, March 26, 2024
1.CALL TO ORDER; ROLL CALL
District II Supervisor Candace Andersen, District III Supervisor
Diane Burgis, District IV Supervisor Ken Carlson, and District V
Supervisor Federal D. Glover
Present:
District I Supervisor John GioiaAbsent:
2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.Inspirational Thought-
"We draw our strength from the very despair in which we have been forced to live. We shall endure." ~Cesar E. Chavez
4.CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.65 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 .
Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
District I Supervisor GioiaAbsent:
Result:Passed
5.PRESENTATIONS
PR.1 PRESENTATION proclaiming April 2024 as Alcohol and Other Drugs Awareness Month and recognize Cynthia Chavez for 6
years of service. (Fatima Matal Sol, Health Services Department)
PR.2 PRESENTATION recognizing Kathy Marsh, Director of Children & Family Services, on her retirement
after 30 years of employment in Contra Costa County. (Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services
Director)
Page 1 of 19
1
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
6.DISCUSSION ITEMS
D.1.HEARING to consider adopting Ordinance No. 2024-04, amending the
County’s ordinance code to update annual device registration fees for the
inspection and testing of commercial weighing and measuring devices .
(Matt Slattengren, Agriculture Commissioner/Weights and Measures
Director)
24-0936
Attachments:Ord 2024-04 re Device Reg Fees
Amended Fee Tables REDLINED
Signed Ordinance 2024-04.pdf
This Discussion Item was approved.
Motion:Burgis
CarlsonSecond:
Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
District I Supervisor GioiaAbsent:
Result:Passed
D.2.HEARING on the itemized costs of abatement for property in
unincorporated Contra Costa County, located at 4560 Gateway Rd.,
Bethel Island, California (Sharp Bertha A Tre, Owner). (Jason Crapo,
Conservation and Development Department)
24-0937
Attachments:A- Itemized Abatement Costs 2482
Before and after pictures 2482
This Discussion Item was approved.
Motion:Burgis
AndersenSecond:
Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
District I Supervisor GioiaAbsent:
Result:Passed
D.3.HEARING on the itemized costs of abatement for property in
unincorporated Contra Costa County, located at a vacant lot on San
Pablo Ave (Assessor's Parcel No. 357-020-025) Rodeo California
(Carquinez Strait Preserv Trust, Owner). (Jason Crapo, Conservation
and Development Department)
24-0938
Attachments:A -Itemized Abatement Costs
Before and after pictures
This Discussion Item was approved.
Motion:Andersen
CarlsonSecond:
Page 2 of 19
2
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
D.4.HEARING on an appeal of the County Planning Commission’s denial of
the Windhover Terrace Apartments Project, a 24-unit apartment building
project located on Windhover Way in the unincorporated Martinez area;
consider approving the project, including approving a density bonus,
approving a development plan, adopting a mitigate negative declaration,
and related actions; and consider approving a community benefits
agreement related to the project. (County File No. CDDP21-03031)
(West Coast Land Development, Inc. – Robert West,
Appellant/Applicant; West Coast Land Development, Inc., Owner) (John
Kopchik, Department of Conservation and Development)
24-0943
Attachments:Attachment A Project Findings and Conditions of Approval.doc
Attachment B Appeal on County Planning Commission's Decision.pdf
Attachment C Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration
Documents.pdf
Attachment D Maps.pdf
Attachment E County Planning Commission Staff Report and
Attachments.pdf
Attachment F Project Plans.pdf
Attachment G Windhover CBA CDDP21-03031 FINAL.pdf
Attachment H CDDP21-03031 Presentation.pdf
Correspondence Received.pdf
Speakers: Wendy Slaney; Kevin Mulcahy; Pat Hise; Charlene Mulcahy; Joe
Hise; Jeannette Barnes. Written commentary received from Margarita Sandoval,
Larry Hanshaw (attached).
This Discussion Item was approved.
Motion:Glover
AndersenSecond:
Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
District I Supervisor GioiaAbsent:
Result:Passed
Page 3 of 19
3
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
D.5.HEARING to consider an appeal of the County Planning Commission's
approval of a 2-story, 1,400-square-foot residential addition at 3455
Freeman Road in the unincorporated Lafayette area and to consider
approving the project, including approving a small lot design review
development plan, and related actions(County File No . CDDP23-03020)
(Harpreet Hansra - Applicant and Property Owner; Lindsey and Logan
Daniels - Appellants). (Everett Louie, Department of Conservation and
Development)
24-0939
Attachments:Attachment 1 - CDDP23-03020 Findings and Conditions of
Approval.pdf
Attachment 2 - CDDP23-03020 BOS Appeal Letter.pdf
Attachment 3 - CPC and ZA Staff Reports.pdf
Attachment 4 - CDDP23-03020 Map of Compatible Homes Within
The Saranap Neighborhood.pdf
Attachment 5 - CDDP23-03020 Plans.pdf
Attachment 6 - CDDP23-03020 Staff Presentation.pdf
2024-03-26 D.5 Corres Rec.pdf
Speakers: Harpreet Hansra (applicant); Sundeep Najar . Written Commentary
provided by Richard Sutcliff, Logan Daniels, Lyn Chen, Geoffrey Foster
(attached)
This Discussion Item was approved.
Motion:Andersen
CarlsonSecond:
Andersen, District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Carlson, and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
District I Supervisor GioiaAbsent:
Result:Passed
D.6 CONSIDER consent item previously removed.
There were no consent items removed for discussion .
11:00 A.M. 30th Annual Cesar E. Chavez Commemorative Celebration
Page 4 of 19
4
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
D.7 PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker)
Edith Pastrano, ACCE (Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment), requested
the Board take action to prevent the closure of the Antioch Amtrak station, citing it ’s
vital importance to the residents of East County;
America, participant in the Stanford University Leadership for Inspiring Physicians
internship program, has created a policy brief on science literacy and outcomes for
children in Contra Costa County, and would like to hear from the Board of Supervisors
if they have information on how equity in sciend education literacy is being addressed
in the county;
Nicole Arrintong, ACCE Antioch, objects to the closure of the Amtrak station, noting
how many rely it on that do not have cars;
Devin Williams asked the Board to take action to prevent the slated closure of the
Antioch Amtrak station and it’s planned move to Oakley, noting that many would not be
able to access its services;
Camillia Miller, ACCE, asked the Board to prevent the planned closure of the Antioch
Amtrak station.
D.8 CONSIDER reports of Board members.
There were no items reported today.
7.ADJOURN
Today's meeting adjourned at 11:33 a.m.
8.CONSENT CALENDAR
Airport
CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS
A motion was made by District II Supervisor Andersen, seconded by District IV
Supervisor Carlson, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion carried by the
following vote:
District I Supervisor Gioia, Andersen, District III Supervisor
Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson, and District V
Supervisor Glover
Aye:
Result:Passed
Page 5 of 19
5
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.1.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to
execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with The KPA
Group to increase the payment limit by $13,020 to a new payment limit of
$1,337,660, and extend the term through June 30, 2024, for the Buchanan
Field terminal project, Concord area. (100% Airport Enterprise Fund)
24-0906
approved
Agriculture/Weights and Measures
C.2.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Agricultural Commissioner, or
designee, to execute a contract with Center for Natural Land
Management to receive an amount not to exceed $22,500 to provide
noxious weed control services in Windemere Ranch Preserve for the
period April 1, 2024, through September 30, 2028. (100% Center for
Natural Land Management)
24-0907
approved
C.3.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Agricultural Commissioner, or
designee, to execute a contract with the California Department of Parks
and Recreation for the County to receive an amount not to exceed
$52,458 to provide services to treat invasive weeds in Mount Diablo
State Park and Marsh Creek State Park for the period of March 27, 2024,
through February 28, 2027. (100% State)
24-0908
approved
Child Support Services
C.4.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Director of Child Support Services, a purchase
order with Alpha Media LLC in an amount not to exceed $27,000 to
provide advertising services for the period May 1, 2024 through April
30, 2025. (66% Federal, 34% State)
24-0879
approved
C.5.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Director of Child Support Services, a purchase
order with Zoom Video Communications Inc, in an amount not to
exceed $2,199, to provide license communications services for the
period April 14, 2024 through April 13, 2025. (66% Federal, 34% State)
24-0880
approved
Clerk of the Board
Page 6 of 19
6
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.6.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-95 recognizing Samhita Chikoti as the
2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Rising Star Volunteerism, as
recommended by the Cesar Chavez Committee.
RES 2024-95
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-95.pdf
adopted
C.7.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-99 recognizing Dhruv Subramanian as the
2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Leadership & Civic Engagement
Rising Star, as recommended by the Cesar Chavez Committee .
RES 2024-99
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-99.pdf
adopted
C.8.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-100 recognizing Mariella Cajina as the
2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Volunteerism, as recommended
by the Cesar Chavez Committee.
RES
2024-100
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-100.pdf
adopted
C.9.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-101 recognizing Aditya Narayan as the
2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Perseverance, as recommended
by the Cesar Chavez Committee.
RES
2024-101
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-101.pdf
adopted
C.10
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-102 recognizing Morelia Gil-Cubillo as
the 2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Leadership & Civic
Engagement, as recommended by the Cesar Chavez Committee .
RES
2024-102
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-102.pdf
adopted
C.11
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-103 recognizing Nitya Varanasi as the
2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Good Samaritan, as
recommended by the Cesar Chavez Committee.
RES
2024-103
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-103.pdf
adopted
C.12
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-104 recognizing Alice Zhou as the 2024
Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Innovation and Empowerment as
recommended by the Cesar Chavez Committee.
RES
2024-104
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-104.pdf
adopted
Page 7 of 19
7
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.13
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-105 recognizing Neil Chandran as the
2024 Youth Hall of Fame Awardee for Teamwork, as recommended by
the Cesar Chavez Committee.
RES
2024-105
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-105.pdf
adopted
C.14
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-96 recognizing Kathy Marsh, Director of
Children & Family Services, on her retirement after 30 years of
employment in Contra Costa County, as recommended by the
Employment and Human Services Director.
RES 2024-96
Attachments:Signed Resolution No. 2024-96
adopted
C.15
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-106 declaring April 2024 as Alcohol and
Other Drugs Awareness Month, as recommended by the Health Services
Director.
RES
2024-106
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-106.pdf
adopted
C.16
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-97 recognizing Cynthia Chavez for her
years of service as a member of the Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory
Board, as recommended by the Health Services Director .
RES 2024-97
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-97.pdf
adopted
C.17
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-98 recognizing the week of March 25th to
March 31st as Farmworker Awareness Week in Contra Costa County, as
recommended by Supervisor Burgis.
RES 2024-98
Attachments:Signed Resolution 2024-98.pdf
adopted
C.18
.
APPOINT Sankara Dumpa to the Appointee 3 seat on the Knightsen
Town Advisory Council to a term expiring December 31, 2024, as
recommended by Supervisor Burgis.
24-0889
approved
C.19
.
REAPPOINT Supervisor Diane Burgis as the Board of Supervisors
alternate representative to the Contra Costa Local Agency Formation
Commission to a new four year term ending on May 6, 2028, as
recommended by Supervisor Glover.
24-0890
approved
Conservation & Development
Page 8 of 19
8
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.20
.
APPROVE change in organic waste collection services to comply with
state regulations and an associated 14.35% rate increase, effective May
1, 2024, for residential customers in the unincorporated East County area
served by Garaventa Enterprises (Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery) under
its franchise agreement with the County, as recommended by the
Conservation and Development Director. (100% Solid waste collection
fees, no General Fund impact)
24-0891
Attachments:Exhibit A - 2024 Rate Review Report for MDRR
approved
C.21
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development
Director, or designee, to execute and submit all documentation necessary
to secure the County’s $356,510 Energy Efficiency & Conservation
Block Grant formula allocation from the U.S. Department of Energy for
a two-year period to be determined upon grant award. (No County
match)
24-0892
approved
District Attorney
C.22
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to
apply for and accept the Workers’ Rights Enforcement Grant from the
California Department of Industrial Relations in an amount up to
$750,000 to fund a Wage Theft Prevention Unit for the period August 1,
2024 through July 31, 2025. (100% State, no County match)
24-0893
approved
Employment & Human Services
C.23
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-107 to approve and authorize the
Employment and Human Services Director, or designee to execute a
contract amendment with the California Department of Aging, to
increase the amount payable to the County by $17,379 to a new amount
not to exceed $1,040,667 for the Health Insurance Counseling and
Advocacy Program with no change to the period July 1, 2021 through
March 31, 2024. (100% Federal, no County match)
RES
2024-107
adopted
Page 9 of 19
9
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.24
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-108 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 increase the payment limit by $100,000 to
a new payment limit not exceed $1,908,994 to administer the
Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program with no change to
the period April 1, 2022 through March 31, 2024. (100% Federal, no
County match)
RES
2024-108
adopted
C.25
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-109 to approve and authorize the
Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a
contract with the California Department of Community Services and
Development, in an amount not to exceed $945,470 to provide
Community Services Block Grant program services for the period
January 1, 2024, through April 30, 2025. (100% Federal, no County
match)
RES
2024-109
adopted
C.26
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services
Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with Young
Men’s Christian Association of the East Bay to increase the payment
limit by $69,213 to a new payment limit not to exceed $9,161,958 to
implement a Head Start and Early Head Start Program Cost of Living
Adjustment with no change to the term July 1, 2023, through June 30,
2024. (86% State, 14% Federal)
24-0894
approved
C.27
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services
Director, or designee, to execute a contract amendment with the
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research-California Volunteers to
extend the term through September 30, 2024, for the Foster Youth
Garden Apprenticeship program with no change to the payment limit of
$2,423,457. (100% State)
24-0895
approved
C.28
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services
Director, or designee, to apply for and accept a grant in an amount not to
exceed $1,000,000 from the State of California, Board of State and
Community Corrections to implement the Byrne State Crisis
Intervention Program Grant for the period July 15, 2024 to September
30, 2026. (100% Federal)
24-0896
approved
Page 10 of 19
10
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.29
.
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, Inc. for the purchase of Word Press
Engine, a website content management software, in an amount not to
exceed $1,096 for the period April 10, 2024 through April 9, 2028. (59%
Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
24-0897
approved
Fire Protection District
C.30
.
Acting as the governing board of the Contra Costa County Fire
Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or
designee, to execute a contract with Stealth Monitoring, Inc ., in an
amount not to exceed $15,000, for the installation of two solar-powered
security tower units to monitor the Byron Wildland Fire Center for the
period April 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. (100% CCCFPD
General Operating Fund)
24-0918
approved
C.31
.
Acting as the governing board of the Contra Costa County Fire
Protection District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or
designee, to execute a purchase order amendment with Golden State Fire
Apparatus to increase the payment by $15,000 for a new payment limit
of $325,000, for required changes made to the design of one Emergency
Crew Transport vehicle, with no change to term. (100% Measure X)
24-0919
approved
Health Services
C.32
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Auditor-Controller, or designee, to
pay the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District $33,000 for
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Fire First Responder medical
equipment, medical supplies, and EMS training for FY 2023-24, as
recommended by the Health Services Director. (100% Measure H Funds,
CSA EM-1, Zone A)
24-0940
approved
C.33
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with
U.S. Foods, Inc. dba U.S. Foodservice, Inc. in an amount not to exceed
$400,000 to supply and deliver fresh and processed fruit, salads,
vegetables and paper products to Discovery House residential program
for the period of April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100%
Substance Use Block Grant funds)
24-0942
approved
Page 11 of 19
11
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.34
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with
Priority Healthcare Distribution, Inc. (dba Curascript Specialty
Distribution) in an amount not to exceed $240,000, for the purchase of
Sublocade for the Martinez Detention Facility for the period from March
1, 2024 through February 28, 2025. (100% Opioid Settlement funds)
24-0920
approved
C.35
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order
amendment with T-Mobile USA, Inc. to increase the payment limit by
$140,000 to a new amount not to exceed $540,000 for mobile coverage
on cell phones and tablets for the Access to Technology Program, and
extend the current term through December 31,2024. (100% Access to
Technology Grant)
24-0921
approved
C.36
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Maxim Healthcare Services Holdings, Inc ., in
an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 to provide behavioral health
treatment – applied behavioral analysis 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)
24-0922
approved
C.37
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Clinical Computer Systems, Inc .,
in an amount not to exceed $276,536 to provide maintenance and
support services regarding OBIX Perinatal Labor and Delivery software
for Contra Costa Health for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30,
2026. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-0923
Attachments:CCSI retro memo signed (23-752)
approved
C.38
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Stephen Aspen Harper, in an amount not to
exceed $231,769 to provide training and consultation to assist the
Medical Residency Unit regarding managing systemization and data
reporting for the period April 1, 2024 through March 31, 2027. (100%
Office of Statewide Health Planning & Development)
24-0924
approved
Page 12 of 19
12
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.39
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to submit an application to the State of California, Business, Consumer
Services and Housing Agency for the Homeless Housing, Assistance,
and Prevention Program, to pay County an amount not to exceed
$6,683,382 to provide supportive housing services for homeless
individuals and families in Contra Costa County for the period July 1,
2024 through June 30, 2028. (100% State)
24-0925
approved
C.40
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Sodexo America, LLC, in an amount not to
exceed $1,560,000 to provide management and oversight of the
Environmental Services Unit at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center
and Contra Costa Health Centers for the period November 1, 2023
through October 31, 2026. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-0926
approved
C.41
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with David Krivan, M.D., (dba Pine Cone Medical
Services), in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide
anesthesiology services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and
Health Centers for the period March 1, 2024 through September 30,
2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-0927
approved
C.42
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Liam Harris, 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 March 1, 2024 through
February 28, 2025. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-0928
approved
C.43
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Steris Corporation, to increase the
payment limit by $104,000 to a new amount not to exceed $718,992 and
extend term through November 30, 2024 for additional repair and
maintenance of sterilizers and other equipment at Contra Costa Regional
Medical Center and Contra Costa Health Centers. (100% Hospital
Enterprise Fund I)
24-0929
approved
Page 13 of 19
13
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.44
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with the Regents of the University of California, on
behalf of the University of California, San Francisco, in an amount not
to exceed $50,000 to provide endocrinology services for patients at
Contra Costa Regional Medical and Health Centers for the period
February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2025, including a two-year
automatic extension through January 31, 2027 in an amount not to
exceed $100,000. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-0930
approved
C.45
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with the City of San Pablo, in an amount not to
exceed $571,552 to provide Mental Health Evaluation Team Program
outreach services to city residents for the period March 1, 2024 through
June 30, 2027. (100% Assembly Bill 109)
24-0931
approved
C.46
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Bright Heart Health Medical
Group, A Medical Corporation, to modify the behavioral health
telehealth services to include dietician telehealth services for Contra
Costa Health Plan members and county recipients with no change in the
payment limit or term ending December 31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa
Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
24-0932
approved
C.47
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract extension with Full Circle of Choices, to extend the
term through June 15, 2024 with no change in the payment limit, for
additional support to promote equity and reduce disparities for persons
with developmental disabilities and continue to serve as the employer of
record for the Specialty Adult Ambassador Program. (100% State
Department of Development Services Grant funds)
24-0933
approved
C.48
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with VistAbiliy, to provide additional
cost survey and attestation services as required by California Advancing
and Innovating Medi-Cal with no change in the payment limit or term
ending June 30, 2024. (88% Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic
and Treatment; 12% Mental Health Services Act)
24-0934
approved
Page 14 of 19
14
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.49
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with La Cheim School, Inc ., effective
March 1, 2024 to provide additional cost survey and attestation services
as required by California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal with no
change in the payment limit or term ending June 30, 2024 (89% Early
and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment; 11% Mental Health
Services Act)
24-0935
approved
Information and Technology
C.50
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, on behalf of the
Chief Information Officer, to execute a purchase order with Carahsoft
Technology Corp, in an amount not to exceed $21,000 for LinkedIn
Learning for Government for the period of April 1, 2024, through March
31, 2025. (100% User Departments)
24-0898
approved
Library
C.51
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with OrangeBoy, Inc.,
in an amount not to exceed $25,165 for the renewal of Savannah with
SmartyCat subscription, a web-based community engagement platform,
for the period November 1, 2023 through October 31, 2024. (100%
Library Fund)
24-0899
approved
C.52
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with OCLC, Inc., in an
amount not to exceed $45,001 for the renewal of CONTENTdm,
EZproxy, Cataloging and Metadata, and Webdewey subscriptions for the
period January 1 through December 31, 2024. (100% Library Fund)
24-0900
approved
C.53
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Crazy Egg, Inc ., in
an amount not to exceed $588 for the renewal of the analytics platform
bundle, for the period February 12, 2024 through February 12, 2025.
(100% Library Fund)
24-0901
approved
Page 15 of 19
15
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.54
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Midwest Tape,
LLC, in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 to provide Hoopla, a digital
resource platform, for the period April 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025.
(100% Library Fund)
24-0902
approved
Public Works
C.55
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-110 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Oak Knoll Road,
on April 10, 2024, from 7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of
utility pole replacement, El Sobrante area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-110
adopted
C.56
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-111 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Park Avenue
near Wildcat Canyon Parkway, on April 10, 2024, through April 11,
2024, from 8:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole
replacement, Richmond area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-111
adopted
C.57
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-112 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Oak View
Avenue, between Colusa Avenue and Ocean View Avenue, on April 19,
2024, from 7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole
replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-112
adopted
C.58
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-113 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Norwood
Avenue, from Highgate Road to Norwood Place, on April 12, 2024,
from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacement of two
utility poles, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-113
adopted
C.59
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-114 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 April 23,
2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole
replacement, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-114
adopted
Page 16 of 19
16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 2024
C.60
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-115 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Bishop Road,
between Atherton Avenue and Hartwell Street, on April 12, 2024, from
7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole replacement,
Crockett area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-115
adopted
C.61
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-116 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Cambridge
Avenue, between Wellesley Avenue and Beloit Avenue, on April 11,
2024, from 7:30 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of utility pole
replacement and overhead utility equipment servicing, Kensington area.
(No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-116
adopted
C.62
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-118 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close Amherst Avenue and
Princeton Avenue, on April 10, 2024, from 9:00 a.m. through 7:00 p.m.,
for the purpose of replacement of two utility poles and overhead utility
equipment servicing, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-118
adopted
C.63
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-117 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Yale Avenue,
between Stanford Avenue and Cambridge Avenue, and Vassar Avenue,
between Yale Avenue and Kentucky Avenue, on March 27, 2024, from
7:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement
and tree trimming, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-117
adopted
C.64
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with the Contra Costa Resource
Conservation District, effective April 1, 2024, to increase the payment
limit by $215,000 to a new payment limit of $745,000 and extend the
term through September 30, 2025, to provide watershed coordination
and outreach services, Countywide. (100% Stormwater Utility Area
Assessment Funds)
24-0904
approved
Risk Management
C.65
.
DENY claims filed by Anthony Allen, Min Huang, Tan Pham & Jenette
Miller, and Clayton Palms Community, LP.
24-0905
approved
Page 17 of 19
17
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 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 18 of 19
18
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes March 26, 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: April 15, 2024 at 10:30 a.m.
Family and Human Services Committee: April 15, 2024 at 10:30 a.m.
Finance Committee: Canceled Next meeting May 6, 2024 at 9:30 a.m.
Head Start Advisory Committee: April 15, 2024 at 9:00 a.m.
Internal Operations Committee: April 8, 2024 at 11:00 a.m.
Legislation Committee: April 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Los Medanos Healthcare Operations Committee: April 8, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
Public Protection Committee: April 25, 2024 at 9:30 a.m.
Sustainability Committee: May 20, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee: April 8, 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 19 of 19
19
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-04
DEVICE REGISTRATION AND INSPECTION FEES
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical
footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance
Code):
SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance amends Section 522-2.404 of Chapter 522-2 of the
County Ordinance Code to update the annual device fees to be collected in Contra Costa County
as permitted by Business and Professions Code section 12240.
SECTION II. Table A (Annual Business Location Fees) and Table B (Annual Device Fees) of
Section 522-2.404 of the County Ordinance Code are hereby amended to read:
Table A (Annual Business Location Fees)
DEVICE FEE AUTHORITY
FEE
Business Location Fee
California Business and
Professions Code (“B&P”)
Section 12240(f) and (u)
$120 per Business
Location
Table B (Annual Device Fees)
DEVICE FEE AUTHORITY
FEE
Water submeters
B&P §12240(g) $6 per device per space
or apartment
Electric submeters
B&P §12240(g) $3 per device per space
or apartment
Vapor (Gas) submeters
B&P §12240(g) $10 per device per
space or apartment
Vehicle m ounted &
w holesale fuel m eters
B&P §12240(m) $75 per device
20
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 2 of 4
Vehicle odometer used to
charge mileage fees,
vehicle rentals, or other
services
B&P §12240(q) and (s)
$60 per device
($340 maximum per
location)
Liquefied and compressed
natural gas m eters, truck
mounted or stationary
B&P §12240(1) $185 per device
Livestock scales
≥10,000 lbs.
B&P §12240(k) $150 per device
Livestock s cales 2,000 –
9,999 lbs.
B&P §12240(k) $100 per device
Jewelry and prescription
scales
B&P §12240(o) $80 per device
Scales marked as, or
meeting the design and
performance
specifications of a Class II
device
B&P §12240(o) $80 per device
Weighing d evices, other
than livestock s cales,
2,000 – 9,999 lbs.
B&P §12240(h) $150 per device
Weighing devices, other
than livestock s cales,
≥10,000 lbs.
B&P §12240(h) $250 per device
21
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 3 of 4
Computing scales < 100
lbs.
B&P §12240(n)
$25 per device
($1,200 maximum per
location)
Weighing devices, other
than computing, interfaced
electronic counter,
jewelry, and prescription
scales, 100 – 1,999 lbs.
B&P §12240(p) $50 per device
All other commercial
weighing and measuring
devices not listed in B&P
§12240(g) to (r)
B&P §12240(t)
$26 per device
($1,200 maximum per
location)
Point-of-sale systems with
1-3 point-of-sale
registers
B&P §13350(d) $149
Point-of-sale systems
with 4-9 point-of-sale
r egisters
B&P §13350(d) $237
Point-of-sale s ystems
with 10 or more point-of-
sale registers
B&P §13350(d) $427
(Ords. 2024-04 § 2, 2016-06 § 2, 2006-09 § 2, 99-09 § 2, 95-9, 94-11, 92-13 § 2, 88-97, 84-2, 83-
16.)
SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage,
and within 15 days after passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for
or against it in the East Bay Times, a newspaper published in this County.
22
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 4 of 4
PASSED on ______________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: MONICA NINO, _________________________________
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair
and County Administrator
By:______________________ [SEAL]
Deputy
23
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 1 of 3
Table A (Annual Business Location Fees)
DEVICE FEE AUTHORITY
FEE
Business Location Fee
California Business and
Professions Code (“B&P”)
Section 12240(f) and (u)
$120 per Business
Location
Table B (Annual Device Fees)
DEVICE FEE AUTHORITY
FEE
Water submeters
B&P §12240(g) $6 per device per space
or apartment
Electric submeters
B&P §12240(g) $3 per device per space
or apartment
Vapor (Gas) submeters
B&P §12240(g) $10 per device per
space or apartment
Vehicle m ounted &
w holesale fuel m eters
B&P §12240(m) $75 per device
Vehicle odometer used to
charge mileage fees,
vehicle rentals, or other
services
B&P §12240(q) and (s)
$60 per device
($340 maximum per
location)
Liquefied and compressed
natural gas m eters, truck
mounted or stationary
B&P §12240(1) $185 per device
Livestock scales B&P §12240(k) $150 per device
24
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 2 of 3
≥10,000 lbs.
Livestock s cales 2,000 –
9,999 lbs.
B&P §12240(k) $100 per device
Jewelry and prescription
scales
B&P §12240(o) $80 per device
Scales marked as, or
meeting the design and
performance
specifications of a Class II
device
B&P §12240(o) $80 per device
Weighing d evices, other
than livestock s cales,
2,000 – 9,999 lbs.
B&P §12240(h) $150 per device
Weighing devices, other
than livestock s cales,
≥10,000 lbs.
B&P §12240(h) $250 per device
Computing scales < 100
lbs.
B&P §12240(n)
$25 per device
($1,200 maximum per
location)
Weighing devices, other
than computing, interfaced
electronic counter,
jewelry, and prescription
scales, 100 – 1,999 lbs.
B&P §12240(p) $50 per device
All other commercial B&P §12240(t) $26 per device
($1,200 maximum per
25
ORDINANCE 2024-04
Page 3 of 3
weighing and measuring
devices not listed in B&P
§12240(g) to (r)
location)
Point-of-sale systems with
1-3 point-of-sale
registers
B&P §13350(d) $149
Point-of-sale systems
with 4-9 point-of-sale
r egisters
B&P §13350(d) $237
Point-of-sale s ystems
with 10 or more point-of-
sale registers
B&P §13350(d) $427
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DATE: February 29, 2024 TO: Clerk of the Board FROM: Department of Conservation & Development By: William Lovan, Building Inspector I RE: Itemized Report of Abatement Costs The following is an itemized report of the costs of abatement for the below described property pursuant to C.C.C. Ord. Code ' 14-6.428. OWNER: Carquinez Strait Preserv Trust POSSESSOR: N/A MORTGAGE HOLDER: N/A ABATEMENT ORDERED DATE: November 30, 2020 & August 17, 2023. ABATEMENT COMPLETED DATE: December 30, 2020 & November 27, 2023. SITE ADDRESS: 0 San Pablo Ave., Rodeo, CA 94572 APN#: 357-020-025 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Residential AMOUNT OF ABATEMENT COSTS (CCC ORDINANCE CODE 14-6.428) ITEM EXPLANATION COST Notice to Comply (include first 2 inspections) $ 600.00 Site Visits (10 x $100 @) $ 2,550.00
Recording Fee $ 34.00 PIRT (Title Search) $ 325.00 Certified Letter & Regular Mailings $ 48.68 Photos $ 20.00 Contractor hired for abatement $ 7,900.00 Final Site Inspection to Confirm Compliance 200.00 Compliance Report and Board Hearing $ 400.00 Total $ 12,077.68
Abatement costs can be paid at or mailed to Department of Conservation and Development, Building Inspection Division, 30 Muir Rd., Martinez, CA 94553.
38
A Vacant Lot on San Pablo
Ave . ( APN: 357-020-025)
Rodeo, CA 94572
Before Photos
39
Go to:
•“Insert” on menu bar. Select “picture”.
•Go to the “Pictures (N:)” drive in the network directory.
•Select the CODE ENF folder.
•Select the folder by parcel number/APN
•Use search bar in the top of the window to type in the parcel number
•In the folder full of pictures, select the photo to be used
•Drag and drop, or double-click the picture
•It will appear on this screen
•Stretch the picture using the little hollow points on the corners, if necessary.
40
41
42
43
A Vacant Lot on San Pablo
Ave . ( APN: 357-020-025)
Rodeo, CA 94572
After Photos
44
45
46
47
48
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031; WEST
COAST LAND AND DEVELOPMENT, INC – PAMELA WEST (APPLICANT & OWNER).
I. FINDINGS
A. Growth Management Performance Standards
1. Traffic: Policy 4-c under Growth Management Program (GMP) requires a traffic impact
analysis be conducted for any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or
PM peak-hour trips based upon the trip generation rates as presented in the Institute of
Traffic Engineers (ITE). A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will
not create or exacerbate any current traffic problems. The project provided a
Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by W-Trans which concluded that the project
would generate 10 AM trips and 12 PM trips. Since the proposed development would
yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, a project-specific traffic impact analysis is
not required and the project is assumed to have a less than significant impact on the
circulation system in the project vicinity.
2. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water
quantity can be provided. The subject property currently receives water service from the
Contra Costa Water District (CCWD), and the district has stated that water service is
available for the project as the entire site is within the water districts service area.
3. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate
sanitary sewer service is available. The project site currently receives sanitary sewer
service from the Mount View Sanitary District (MVSD) and MVSD sewer mains in the area
are available for the project. The district provided a letter stating that the applicant shall
submit a sewer permit application with the district for review and approval.
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
district, or requires that an automatic fire sprinkler system be installed to satisfy this
standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
jurisdiction and is located approximately six minute drive time from Contra Costa County
Fire Station #14 located at 521 Jones Street in Martinez. The project is required to
comply with the applicable provisions of the California Fire Code, the California
Residential Code, and Contra Costa County Ordinances that pertain to emergency
access, fire suppression systems, and fire detection/warning systems. When it comes
time to submit for building permits, the construction drawings would have to be
reviewed and approved by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
5. Public Protection: Public protection standards under the GMP require that a Sheriff
Facility standard of 155 square feet of station area and support facilities per 1,000 in
49
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 2
population shall be maintained within the unincorporated area of the County. Based on
the United States Census Bureau’s estimate of 2.48 persons per household (between
2017-2021) for Martinez, the project would potentially increase the population by an
estimated 89.28 people. Since the project would result in a relatively small change in
population, the project would not impact the County’s ability to maintain a Sheriff facility
standard of 155 square feet of station area and support facilities per 1,000 members of
the population. Thus, the project would not significantly affect the provision of police
services to the Martinez area.
6. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, Condition of
Approval (COA) #21 and #22 requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park
Impact and Park Dedication in-lieu fees for the new units. 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 located in Flood Zone X, as designated on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps. 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. With the included
exception to Title 9, 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.
B. Development Plan Findings
1. Required Finding: The proposed project is consistent with the purpose of the
zoning district:
Project Finding: The purpose of the M-29 Multiple Family Residential (M-29) district is
to allow multiple-family residential development to be compatible as much as possible
with nearby single-family residential zoning. The project will largely conform to the M-29
District development standards related to setbacks, lot coverage, and other standards.
Variances to the development standards meet the intent of the standards, as required by
the Variance findings. The project also has submitted a Density Bonus Request and is
requesting parking ratios pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) and multiple reduction
to development pursuant to Government Code 65915(e). With these requests, the
50
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 3
proposed project creates a multi-family apartment complex that is a permitted use under
84-26.402(3).
2. Required Finding: The proposed project is architecturally compatible with other
uses in the vicinity, both inside and outside the zoning district.
Project Finding: Given the density of housing development in the area (townhomes,
duplexes, single-family residence), the design does not conflict with the surroundings in
building mass or height. The architectural style in this area of the County can be
described as a diverse collection of Ranch, Mediterranean, Spanish Revival, and
contemporary modern styles. The project’s contemporary design would be comprised of
three segments separated by staircase breezeways, joined under one unified flat roof to
minimize the overall bulk of the structure. Building design incorporates a rectangular
shape with all exterior walls of each level at the same location to create one cohesive
building from top to bottom while the open breezeway at each level adds depth and
variation to the exterior of the building. The façade of the building will have variation
with sandstone color stucco alternating with pearl gray shingle siding. The colors of the
building will be designed to compliment the surrounding natural palette of the area.
C. Variance Findings:
1. Required Finding: Any variance authorized shall not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and
the respective land use district in which the subject property is located.
Project Finding for Height: The project had a original request for a 38’-6” height.
However, after the County Planning Commission hearing and subsequent meeting with
the Board of Supervisor, the applicant agreed to lower the total height of the building.
Therefore, the variance request is to allow a 34.25-foot tall building (where 30 feet is the
maximum allowed). Given that the height is due to unique topographical characteristics
and drainage restrictions, granting of the variance for the building height would not be
considered a grant of special privilege. In order to meet drainage requirements that
require stormwater to drain to adequate stormwater infrastructure at Windhover Way,
the rear of the lot must be padded (i.e., filled with dirt to raise the grade). Currently, the
rear of the lot is almost nine feet lower than the frontage (Windhover Way). The project
will pad almost nine feet towards the rear to bring the site level and 4’-6” of padding
under the building itself. This extensive amount of padding raises the finished grade
under the rear of the building, resulting in a height that exceeds the 30-foot standard
when measured from natural grade. Complying with the height restriction would present
a practical difficulty because the project is required to have drainage improvements due
to topography. Additionally, in order to meet the required density of the General Plan
51
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 4
Land Use Designation for this site, the project was required to add more units, which
prompted the height increase. Strict application of the zoning code would present an
unnecessary burden on the site by reducing the amount of units on site by eight, which
would result in a total of 16 units, which is on the lower end for the General Plan Land
Use Designation. For these reasons, the height of the building is not a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties in the vicinity and
respective land use district.
Project Finding for Driveway Aisle Width:
The variance request is to allow for a 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the
minimum required) for a driveway aisle with parking spaces of ninety degrees located on
the eastern side of the multi-family apartment building. Granting the variance for the
reduced driveway aisle width would not be a grant of special privilege. The irregular flag-
shaped property has an approximately 48-foot-wide by 72-foot-long strip of land that
extends access to Windhover way. The strip of land presents a unique restriction only
applicable to this site. The unique shape unreasonably limits development on the
property in a way that the required density is only feasible with reduced driveway aisle
width. In order to facilitate and maintain circulation and to allow the site to provide
adequate parking spaces, the driveway aisle width needs to be slightly reduced.
Complying with the ordinance for driveway aisle width would present a practical
difficulty because it would reduce the amount of parking on the site and limit the total
developable area. For these reasons, the reduced driveway aisle width is not a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties in the vicinity and
respective land use district.
2. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property because of its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict
application of the respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject
property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the
identical land use district.
Project Finding for Height: Given that the additional height is due to unique
topographical characteristics and drainage restrictions, granting of the variance for the
building height is based on special circumstances. In order to meet drainage
requirements that require stormwater to drain to adequate stormwater infrastructure at
Windhover Way, the rear of the lot must be raised by padding from approximately 9 feet
at the rear property line to 4’-6” underneath the building. Given that the site slopes away
from Windhover Way, the building is required to be raised to address drainage issues.
Thus, due to these special circumstances, the strict application of zoning regulations
would deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by other properties developed as
multiple-family projects.
52
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 5
Project Finding for Driveway Aisle Width: The variance request is to allow for a 24.5’
driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the required minimum). The irregular flag-shaped
property has a 48-foot-wide by 72-foot-long strip of land that extends access to
Windhover Way. This unique shape limits the placement and development of a driveway
aisle width on the property as there are already numerous other constraints. To provide a
driveway aisle for parking spaces to be accessed, the only feasible location is between
the parking spaces. The flagged driveway results in additional area on the lot that must
be paved in order to reach the larger developable portion of the lot. Thus, a 25’ driveway
aisle would not be feasible while also providing parking, open space, covered parking
and space for the building. Thus, due to these special circumstances, the strict
application of the zoning regulations would deprive the subject property of rights
enjoyed by other properties developed as multiple-family projects.
3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall substantially meet the intent
and purpose of the respective land use district in which the subject property is
located.
Project Finding for Height: Height limits are applied to provide an orderly residential
development pattern and adequate air and light between neighboring development. The
4.25-feet of additional height would substantially meet the intent and purpose of the
respective 30-foot height maximum as all building setbacks are met and exceeded. The
building would maintain separation from neighboring properties. The variance request
will allow for the project to address drainage and topography issues without burdening
the applicant. Therefore the height would not have a detrimental effect on the adjoining
properties and meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.
Project Finding for Driveway Aisle Width: The variance request is to allow for a
reduced 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required). The driveway
aisle width allows for cars to maneuver in and out of parking spaces. The proposed
driveway aisle width is only 0.5’ less than the minimum requirement. Due to site
constraints, the project has balanced the need to provide the full driveway aisle width
with the need to provide for adequate parking spots and landscaping requirements. The
loss of 0.5’ les for a driveway aisle width will not have a detrimental effect on the
adjoining properties and meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.
4. Findings for Granting an Exception Per Section 92-6.002:
Request for an exception from Title 9 Offsite Collect and Convey Diversion
requirements (Section 914-2.0040)
1. Required Finding: That there are unusual circumstances or conditions affecting the
property.
53
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 6
Project Finding: The property slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner,
away and considerably below street grade. There is no storm drain or easement at the
lowest corner of the site. On-site drainage facilities will be installed to tie into the
existing storm drain on Windhover Way to the west. The storm drain is deep enough to
allow for gravity drainage from the stormwater treatment facilities but was not originally
intended to accept stormwater runoff from this site. Considering this site’s unusual
circumstances and conditions, an exception from the County Ordinance Code prohibition
regarding diversions would be required.
2. Required Finding: That the exception is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right.
Project Finding: The diversion of stormwater is necessary to connect the project to
stormwater facilities in the area. A connection at the southeast corner of the property is
not currently possible, meaning this infill project is not feasible unless the exception is
granted. Additionally, as described above, the drainage infrastructure already exists
within the Windhover Way right-of-way making this the most appropriate location.
3. Required Finding: 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: Capacity of the downstream drainage system will be verified to ensure
it is sufficient to accommodate the additional runoff. Additionally, stormwater would be
directed to existing infrastructure used by other properties in the area. Therefore, the
exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
properties in the territory in which the subject property is situated.
The applicant will be required to provide a drainage report to verify the adequacy of the
downstream drainage system. If the receiving system is found to be inadequate the
applicant shall be required to improve the system to make it adequate.
5. Tree Protection and Preservation Findings:
Required Factors for Granting Tree Permit: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied the
following factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree
permit have been satisfied:
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.
54
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 7
Where the arborist or forester report has been required, and the director is satisfied
that the issuance of a permit will not negatively affect the sustainability of the
resource.
The project proposes to remove tree #35, 36, 37 and 38. The project proposes to
work within the dripline of tree # 40, 41 and 42. All feasible efforts have been made
to retain the maximum number of trees and that development of this project cannot
be reasonably accommodated on other parts of the property due to the shape and
orientation of the property. The trees are required to be removed in order for the
appropriate infrastructure to be built to support a project of this size. Development
on this property can not occur without the removal of trees. An arborist report was
provided which concluded that the trees to be removed are moderate to low health.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Finding
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15071 and Section 15072, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration/Initial Study (MND) was prepared and published for the project. The 20-day
public review period for the MND started on July 11, 2023, and ended on July 31, 2023.
Seven public comments were received during the public review period for the MND. The
comments received did not specifically challenge the adequacy of the environmental
document. Neither the comment nor the staff response to the comment result in any
changes to the MND, and the impacts, mitigation measures, and findings of the MND are
unchanged.
On the basis of the whole record before it, including the MND, and in accordance with
Section 15074, the County Planning Commission finds that:
There is no substantial evidence that the project with the proposed mitigation
measures will have a significant effect on the environment;
The MND reflects the County’s independent judgement and analysis;
The MND is adequate and complete; and
The MND has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA guidelines.
Pursuant to CEQA Section 15097, a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared,
based on the identified impacts and mitigation measures in the MND. The Mitigation
Monitoring Program is intended to ensure that the mitigation measures identified in the
MND are implemented. All mitigation measures are included in the Conditions of Approval
for the project.
55
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 8
II. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031
Project Approval
1. Development Plan for a 24-unit apartment project is APPROVED, as generally shown
and based on the following documents:
Applicant and materials submitted to the Department of Conservation and
Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on October 21, 2021;
Revised project plans received on March 15, 2022;
Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan prepared by CALICHI Design Group,
prepared by Reco V. Prianto on February 15, 2022 and received on March 15,
2022;
Arborist Report prepared by Pam Nagle of Hort Science on January 17, 2022,
Certified Arborist #WE-9617A, received on March 15, 2022;
Noise Assessment Report prepared by Michael Thill of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc,
on May 10, 2022, received on May 21, 2022;
Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by W-Trans and received on September
7, 2022;
Density Bonus Request received on March 15, 2022, and subsequent revised
Density Bonus Requests dated August 24, 2022, October 12, 2022 and December
20, 2022.
Board of Supervisors Staff Report, dated March 26, 2024.
2. Approval is granted to allow the following variances that meet the requirements of
Section 26-2.2006 of the County Ordinance Code:
A. 34.25’ building height (where 30’ is the maximum)
B. 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required)
3. Approval is granted to allow for the following exception that meet the requirements of
Section 92-6.002 of the County Ordinance Code:
A. Exception to Collect and Convey Requirements.
4. Concession is granted for the following:
A. A reduction to the amount of Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%.
5. Reduction in development standards is granted for the following:
56
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 9
A. State density bonus parking ratio; 40 off-street parking spaces provided for this
project.
B. A reduction in development standards to allow for reduced parking stall sizes of
9’ x 18’, 9’ x 17’ and 7.5’ x 14.5’. where 9’ x 19’ is the standard.
C. A reduction in development standards to allow for reducing parking setbacks
including a 2’ side yard (where 20 is the minimum) and a 17.5’ front yard setback
(where 25 is the minimum), per plans.
D. A reduction of the covered parking for 16 total covered spaces (where one-half of
the required spaces shall be covered).
6. Any change from the approved plans shall require review and approval by CDD and may
require the filing of an application to modify the Development Plan.
Application Fees
7. This Development Plan Permit application is subject to an initial application deposit of
$5,000.00, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials 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 2019/553, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the Department of
Conservation and Development may seek a court judgement against the applicant and
will charge interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of judgement. The
applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed
to the applicant shortly after permit issuance.
Indemnification
8. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the property
owner or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County,
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, of annual, the
Agency’s approval concerning this development plan application, which action is
brought within the time period provided in Section 66499.37. The County will promptly
notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the
defense.
Compliance Report
57
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 10
9. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, 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. The permit compliance review is subject to
staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $1,500, which shall be paid at
the time of submittal of the compliance report.
Signage
10. No signage is approved with this permit. Any proposed signage is subject to review and
approval by the Department of Conservation and Development under a Sign Permit
application. All signage must comply with the Sign Ordinance, Chapter 88-6, Ordinance
No. 2022-03.
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus
11. This project is subject to 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(a) of the County Ordinance Code, in a residential
development of 22 rental units, at least fifteen percent of the rental units shall be
developed and rented as inclusionary units.
The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 3.3
inclusionary units for the project. The Applicant has submitted a revised Inclusionary
Housing Plan received December 27, 2022, which proposed to construct three
inclusionary units within the housing development. Two units will be available to lower-
income households (80% Area Median Income (AMI)), and one unit will be available to a
very low-income household (50% AMI). The fractional unit of 0.3 would be satisfied with
the payment of a partial in-lieu fee.
The Applicant submitted a revised density bonus request with their revised inclusionary
housing plan received December 27, 2022. As described in the HCI April 19, 2022, memo,
the Applicant is eligible for a 24.5% density bonus as the Applicant proposed to build
on-site three lower-income units or 13% of the units in the housing development as
affordable to lower-income households. For this project, the inclusionary housing units
are also the lower income units that qualify the project for a density bonus. The
Applicant’s Inclusionary Housing Plan and density bonus request propose a density
bonus of 2 units, or a 9% bonus, with one requested concession and various reductions
in development standards, bringing the total number of units in the project from 22 to
24.
58
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 11
Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive
Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant has proposed a housing
development that will contain units that comply with Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A)
and may request one concession/incentive for providing 13 percent of the total units of
a housing development for lower-income households within the development. For use of
the one concession, the Applicant requested reduced open space requirement pursuant
to Government Code 65915(d). Additionally, the Applicant has requested parking ratios
based on Government Code 65915(p) for a reduced parking requirement. The request
also includes reductions in development standards pursuant to Government Code
65915(e) for reduced parking stall sizes, reduced parking setbacks and reduced covered
parking.
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for reductions in development standards
for the following:
Density Bonus – Parking Ratio
Parking ratios pursuant to 65915 (p).
1 Bedroom Units = 1 off-street parking space (where 1.5 spaces are required)
2 Bedroom Units = 1.5 off street parking space (where 2 spaces are required)
Density Bonus – Reduction of Development Standards
Parking stall sizes of 9 feet x 18 feet and 9 feet x 17 feet (where 9 feet x 19 feet is
required)
Front Parking setbacks of 17.5 feet (where 25 feet minimum is required).
Side Parking setbacks of 2 feet (where 20 feet minimum is required).
16 total covered parking (where one-half of the required spaces shall be
covered).
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for one concession, as follows:
Open space requirement of 20% (where the open space requirement is 25% of
land area, with 75% of that area landscaped)
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement
12. At least 90 days prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building,
demolition, or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of a
59
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 12
condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall initiate the County’s
preparation and execution of an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing
Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant
to County Ordinance Chapter 822-4 - Inclusionary Housing, County Ordinance Chapter
822-2 - Density Bonus, and Government Code 65915 to ensure that two (2) of the
approved units are affordable to and occupied by lower-income households, and one (1)
of the approved units is affordable to and occupied by a very low-income household.
The Agreement shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for approval on behalf of
the County. Following the execution of the Agreement, the completed Agreement will be
filed and recorded on the subject property.
The three (3) on-site inclusionary units identified will include:
1 Studio unit at Very Low Income (50% AMI)
2 Two-bedroom units at Lower Income (80% AMI)
Maximum affordable rents shall be determined annually by the County and adjusted for
family size appropriate for the unit.
The continued affordability of all lower-income rental units and very low-income rental
units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income categories for fifty-
five (55) years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage
financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
Definitions
Terms and definitions used in these conditions of approval may be found in the above-
referenced County Ordinance Codes and Government Code.
A. Affordable rent – means a rent, including a reasonable utility allowance determined
by the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) Director, or designee,
that does not exceed the following calculations pursuant to Health & Safety Code
Section 50053:
For Lower-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times sixty percent of
the area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
For Very Low-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times fifty percent of
the area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
B. Inclusionary Unit – means a rental unit that is required to be rented at an affordable
rent to the households specified in Section 822-4.402.
60
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 13
C. Lower-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed the
lower income limits applicable to Contra Costa County, adjusted for household size,
as published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5.
D. Very Low-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed
the very low-income limits applicable to Contra Costa County adjusted for household
size, as published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50105.
Inclusionary Housing Partial In-Lieu Fee
13. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building, demolition, or
grading permit for the housing development, whichever occurs first, the Applicant
shall pay the County the partial in-lieu fee for the remaining fractional 0.3 inclusionary
unit. The current in-lieu fee calculation is based on the 22 base units, and excludes the
density bonus units, is $48,401.10. However, the actual fee collected will be that which is
applicable prior to CDD approval of the grading permit, building permit, or demolition
permit, whichever occurs first.
This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferrable.
General
14. The following are general terms for the granting of density bonus and the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance.
A. The Applicant hereby represents, warrants, and covenants that it will cause the
Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County,
California, and in such other places as the County may reasonably request. The
Applicant shall pay all fees and charges incurred in connection with any such
recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the
document by the County and prior to CDD’s approval of a building permit or grading
permit.
B. The County will provide the Applicant a form for income certification to be
completed by the renters. The income levels of all very low-income household and
lower-income household applicants for units in the project shall be certified by DCD
prior to initial occupancy and annually thereafter and records shall be maintained by
the Applicant over the entire term of the period of affordability.
61
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 14
C. The three (3) inclusionary units in the project shall be available for rent on a
continuous basis 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
renting the units, except to the extent that the units are required to be rented to a
very low-income household and lower-income households. 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 rent of any 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 with reference to the selection, location,
number, use, or occupancy of renters of any unit or in connection with employment
of persons for the construction of the project.
D. In addition to any other marketing efforts, the lower-income units, and very low-
income units shall be marketed through local non-profit, social service, faith-based,
and other organizations that have potential renters as clients or constituents. The
Applicant shall translate marketing materials into Spanish and Chinese. A copy of the
translated marketing materials, tenant selection plan, and marketing plan shall be
submitted to Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) at least
three months prior to the marketing of the inclusionary units for the review and
approval of DCD, and on an annual basis with the annual report.
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, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea
Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily.
E. Upon violation of any of the provisions of the Agreement by the Applicant, the
County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the
violation. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a
reasonable period of time, 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 this 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.
Development Standards
62
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 15
15. The inclusionary units are subject to the standards of Section 822-4.412 of the County
Ordinance.
16. All inclusionary units must be constructed and occupied prior to or concurrently with the
market rate units within the same residential development.
Location (Inclusionary Units)
17. Inclusionary units must be dispersed throughout the residential development and have
access to all on-site amenities that are available to market-rate units.
Annual Reporting and Compliance Review
18. Prior to the initial occupancy of each inclusionary unit, the Applicant shall submit to
the Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval compliance
review application and fee along with the following information for review and approval
of qualified tenants: forms and documentation that demonstrates the tenants of the
inclusionary units have been certified as a qualified lower income household or very low-
income households. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection of the building
permit until all documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of
Conservation and Development.
19. After the initial occupancy of the inclusionary units, the Applicant shall submit to
the Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval
compliance review application and fee along with an annual compliance review
report for all inclusionary units and density bonus units. The report must include the
name, unit number, household size, and income of each person occupying inclusionary
units, identify the number of bedrooms and monthly rent or cost (including utility
allowance) of each inclusionary unit, and the affordability restriction of the unit. Tenants
in rental housing developments shall provide consent to the owners to allow these
disclosures. The annual compliance review report is due April 1.
20. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and
Development informed of the contact information of the owner or local designee who is
responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be
contacted (i.e., mailing and email addresses, and telephone number) at all times.
A. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building,
demolition, or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of
a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the
name of the owner or local designee representing the owner of the property for
63
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 16
permit compliance and their contact information including phone number, e-mail
address, and mailing address.
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 project name, project
address, 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.
Park Impact Fee
21. Prior to CDD stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay the applicable park impact fee as established by the Board of
Supervisors.
Park Dedication Fee
22. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay the applicable park dedication fee as established by the Board of
Supervisors.
Child Care Fee
23. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay a per unit fee toward childcare facility needs in the area as
established by the Board of Supervisors.
Aesthetics
24. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the (CDD) for
review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the proposed
light post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed down
and screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent
glare or excessive light spillover. (MM Aesthetics-1)
64
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 17
25. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, a Final Landscape Plan shall be
submitted to the (CDD) for review and approval. The Final landscape plan shall include
the following: The location of the two required communal gathering areas and
associated improvements, the height of the perimeter concrete walls have been
increased to seven feet tall and the location and species of the trees to be planted along
the northern property line which are required to reduce noise, light and visual impacts.
The Final landscaping plan shall conform to the County’s Water Efficient Landscapes
Ordinance. Prior to requesting a final inspection, the approved landscaping shall be
installed and evidence of the installation (e.g., photos) shall be provided for the review
and approval of CDD.
Restitution for Tree Removal
26. Required Restitution for Approved Tree Removal: The following measures are intended
to provide restitution for the removal of four code-protected trees (Trees #35, 36, 37, 38)
A. Tree Restitution Planting and Irrigation Plan: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal,
whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a tree planting and irrigation
plan prepared by a licensed arborist or landscape architect for the review and
approval of CDD. The plan shall provide for the planting of ten 24-inch boxed
trees or larger. The plan shall comply with the County’s Water Efficient
Landscapes Ordinance. The plan shall be accompanied by an estimate prepared
by a licensed landscape architect or arborist of the materials and labor costs to
complete the improvements on the plan. The plan shall be implemented prior
to final building inspection of the building.
B. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to CDD-
stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or
tree removal, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a security (e.g.
bond, cash deposit) that is acceptable to the CDD. The bond shall include the
amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge.
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.
65
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 18
D. Duration of Security: The security 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 apartment building 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).
E. Integration with Final Landscape Plan: The tree restitution planting and irrigation
plans described in subsection (a) above may be incorporated as part of the Final
Landscape Plan required pursuant to Condition #26 above. However, the planting
plan shall identify the replacement trees required to replace removed protected
trees, which are intended to satisfy this condition. In addition, the provided
estimate shall only cover materials and labor associated with the implementation
of the required tree restitution, and not for the full landscape plan.
Contingency Restitution Should Altered Trees Be Damaged
27. This permit does not approve removal of any off-site trees as identified by the
Consulting Arborist Tree Assessment dated received on March 15, 2022 as Tree #39 and
#43. The project proponent must also preserve the Olive Trees #40, #41 and #42.
28. Security for Possible Damage to Trees Intended for Preservation: Pursuant to the
requirements of Section 816-6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance,
to address the possibility that construction activity damages trees that are to be
preserved, the applicant shall provide the County with a security to allow for replacement
of trees that are significantly damaged or destroyed by construction activity. Prior to
CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or
work within the dripline of trees, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide
a cash or surety bond that is acceptable to CDD. The security shall be an amount
sufficient to cover:
A. Preparation of a landscaping and irrigation plan by a licensed landscape architect,
arborist, or landscape contractor for the review and approval of the CDD. The
plan shall provide for planting of four (4) trees of a native indigenous species of
15-gallons in size. The plan shall comply with the County’s Water Efficient
Landscapes Ordinance, and verification of such shall accompany the plan.
B. The estimated materials and labor costs to complete the improvements shown on
the approved planting and irrigation plan (accounting for supply, delivery, and
66
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 19
installation of trees and irrigation). The bond shall include the amount of the
approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge.
C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: Prior to the removal or work within the
dripline of trees or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits
(e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs, the applicant shall
provide a cash or surety bond that is acceptable to CDD, the County ordinance
requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs for
processing the required security. At the time of submittal of the security, the
applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200.00.
D. Duration of Security: The security shall be retained by the County for a minimum
of 12 months and up to 24 months beyond the completion of the tree alteration
improvements (i.e., date of final inspection). After the final inspection has been
completed, the applicant shall submit a letter to the CDD, composed by a
consulting arborist, describing any construction impacts to trees intended for
preservation. As a prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12- and 24-
months, the applicant shall arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees
and to prepare a report on the tree’s health. The report shall be submitted to the
CDD for review, and it shall include any additional measures necessary for
preserving the health of the trees.
29. Tree removal shall occur only with an approved grading or building permit.
Pre-construction treatments
30. Prior to the removal of any trees the project proponent shall hire a certified consulting
arborist to be on-site. The contract shall identify the arborist, field schedule, and contact
information. The Arborist must review all plans for pre-construction treatment,
demolition, grading, drainage, utility, and landscape with irrigation. Prior to issuance of a
grading and/or building permit, a copy of the contract must be submitted to CDD for
review.
31. The project’s perimeter security fence will serve as the Tree Protection Zone. No grading,
excavation, construction, or storage of materials should occur outside the project limit.
32. Off-site trees to be preserved may require pruning to provide clearance for demolition,
grading and construction. Tree care firm providing the pruning shall be a State of
California Licensed Tree Contractor (C61/D49). All pruning shall be done by Certified
Arborist or Certified Tree Worker in accordance with the latest edition of the Best
Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of Arboriculture) and the
American National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300).
67
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 20
33. Tree(s) to be removed that have branches extending into the canopy of tree(s) to remain
shall be removed by a Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker and not by the
demolition contractor. The Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker shall remove the
trees in a manner that causes no damage to the tree(s) and understory to remain.
34. Trees to be removed shall be felled to fall away from TREE PROTECTION ZONE and
avoid pulling and breaking roots of off-site trees to remain. If roots are entwined, the
Consulting Arborist may require first severing the major woody root mass before
extracting the trees.
35. All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California Fish
and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent feasible tree
pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding season. Breeding bird
surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified biologists should be involved
in establishing work buffers for active nests.
Tree Protection During Construction
36. Any approved grading, construction, demolition, or other work within 5-ft of the TREE
PROTECTION ZONE near tree #39 must be monitored by the Consulting Arborist.
37. Any root pruning that will occur within 5-ft. of the Tree Protection Zone near tree #39
shall receive prior approval and may be supervised by the Consulting Arborist. Roots
should be cut with a saw to provide a flat and smooth cut. Removal of roots larger than
2” in diameter should be avoided.
38. If roots 2” and greater in diameter are encountered during site work and must be cut to
complete the construction, the Consulting Arborist must be consulted to evaluate effects
on the health and stability of the tree and recommend treatment.
39. If injury should occur to any tree during construction, it should be evaluated as soon as
possible by the Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be applied.
Community Benefits Agreement
40. The applicant has agreed to enter into a Community Benefits Agreement with the County
to make a onetime community benefits contribution to the County to benefit the local
community, which funds may be used to, for example and without limitation: fund
studies and actions to improve the functionality of roadways; establish or maintain parks
or trails; maintain or beautify roadways, rights-of-way, or open space; or establish,
maintain, or beautify other community improvements. Prior to CDD stamp of approval
for the issuance of a grading or building permit (whichever comes first), the
permittee shall provide CDD staff with evidence that the permittee and County have
68
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 21
entered into an agreement which details the terms and conditions of executing the
permittee’s planned Community Benefit initiative. The agreement shall be consistent with
the draft Community Benefit Agreement attached to the March 26, 2024 Board of
Supervisors Staff Report.
Archeological and Cultural Resources
41. The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground disturbance
and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans
for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs
first, the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed
below are include on the construction plans.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading,
or trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if
they observe any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural
resource discovery (e.g. wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains;
debris-filled wells or privies; deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of
prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during ground
disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected
and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and, if necessary,
develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the County and
other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be
mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be
prepared documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report
should be submitted to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate
Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are
of a Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American
Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American
Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the
property and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains
and associated grave goods.
69
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 22
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist
should prepare a report documenting the methods and results and provide
recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated
cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations
of the MLD. The report should be submitted to the Northwest Information Center
and appropriate Contra Costa agencies. (MM Cultural-1)
Geology and Soils
42. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall submit a
geotechnical report update with the geotechnical review fee in the amount of $3,000,
referencing the proposed grading, drainage and foundation plans and providing specific
criteria and standards for site grading, drainage and foundation design based on
adequate subsurface data, laboratory testing of samples and engineering analysis. The
scope of the geotechnical investigation shall address the following potential hazards: (i)
expansive soils, (ii) corrosive soils, (iii) siting and design of any required bio-retention
facilities and/or other measures that may be recommended to achieve compliance with
the clean water requirements of the RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing
undocumented fills and effective measures to control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v)
provide seismic parameters based on the adopted California Building Code at the time
that a residential building permit is requested. (MM Geology-1)
43. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the geotechnical report update
required by Condition of Approval #40, above, shall be subject to review by the County’s
peer review geologist, and review/approval of the CDD. Improvement, grading and
building plans shall carry out the recommendations of the approved report. (MM
Geology-2)
44. Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of foundation-related work) the
project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential testing of the graded
building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid damage to
improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel). (MM Geology-3)
70
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 23
45. The geotechnical report required by Condition of Approval #39 routinely includes
recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. These
services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer
to (i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed
conditions during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the
basis of the design recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the
opportunity for field modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID
approval), based on exposed conditions. The monitoring shall commence during
clearing, and extend through grading, including testing services during placement of
engineered fill, installation of recommended drainage facilities, and foundation related
work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final” grading inspection, pending submittal of
a report from the project geotechnical engineer that documents their observation and
testing services during grading, installation of drainage improvements. (MM Geology-4)
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the
apartment building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer
documenting the monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-
related geotechnical recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier
hole drilling/ foundation preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g.
collection of roof gutter runoff in a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable
discharge point; and possibly installation of a subdrain system around the perimeter of
the foundation to control moisture beneath the foundation). (MM Geology-4)
46. All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during the dry season (April 15
through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be revegetated to minimize
erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion control work
shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved by the
Building Inspection Division. (MM Geology-5)
47. Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during grading, trenching, or
other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials shall be
stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find,
and, if deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s). (MM Geology-6)
71
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 24
Traffic Study
48. Withing 6 months after the Certificate of Occupancy permit has been issued, the
Developer or project proponents must submit a detailed Traffic Analysis and modeling
study prepared by a qualified Transportation Consultant for the review and approval by
Public Works Department and the Department of Conservation and Development,
Community Development Division to determine if a traffic signal timing change is
needed to increase the frequency and time of vehicle gaps while also reviewing traffic
flow on Pacheco Boulevard.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM Program)
49. Consistent with the County’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance,
which requires a residential project with 13 or more units to develop a TDM program, a
TDM Program must be submitted to the CDD for review prior to CDD-stamp approval
of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first.
The TDM program shall include at least the following:
A. The TDM Program should include a site map/plan that identifies existing and
proposed bicycle, pedestrian, and transit amenities and improvements. The TDM
program should also include a map/plan identifying key destinations (e.g. schools,
community facilities, parks, shopping areas, major pedestrian and bicycle facilities,
transit stops) in proximity to the project that can be reached by walking, biking, or
taking transit.
B. The TDM Program should identify the promotions, events, and incentives that would
be marketed to residents as part of the program. A list of potential promotions,
events, and incentives can be found on the 511 Contra Costa website.
C. A sample of the virtual format (e.g. website) that would be used to display TDM
information to residents.
D. Within six months following the granting of a certificate of occupancy of the new
development site, the project shall submit to the Director of the Department of
Conservation and Development a TDM notice that confirms the installation of
facilities and site amenities, as well as implementation of commute program features
and events (if required).
Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance
50. In accordance with the County’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance, the project is required to
provide ten percent of the total parking spaces at the site shall be EV charging spaces
(3). Half of the EV charging spaces (minimum 1 space) shall install fully operational
(minimum Level 2 or higher) EV charging stations. The remaining EV charging spaces
shall be capable of supporting future electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
72
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 25
Bicycle Parking
51. A total of 8 bicycle spaces shall be provided, consisting of 6 long-term bicycle spaces
and 2 short-term bicycle spaces.
Debris Recovery
52. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, whichever occurs first,, the developer shall submit a Construction Waste
Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen
requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65%, or current CalGreen
mandate, of construction and demolition (C&D) waste materials generated at jobsite.
53. Prior to requesting a Final Inspection for the multiple-family residential building,
the developer shall submit a Construction Waste Management Final Report containing
information and supporting documentation that demonstrates compliance with
CalGreen requirements to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65%, or current
CalGreen mandate, of C&D waste materials generated at jobsite.
Air Quality
54. The following mitigations shall be included on all construction plans and implemented
throughout the construction phase of the project:
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.
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.
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
73
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 26
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.
The property owner or site contractor shall 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.
Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6 -
to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
All contractors shall use equipment that meets the California Air Resources Board' s
(CARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.
(MM Air Quality-1)
Construction Restrictions and Requirements
55. All windows and doors shall have the minimum ratings STC 26 and mechanical
ventilation installed for the building. (MM Noise-1)
56. The following construction restrictions shall be implemented during project construction
and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans
for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first , the
applicant shall provide evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are
include on the face of the construction plans.
A. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related
disruptions to adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be
communicated to all project-related contractors. The applicant shall notify
neighbors within 300 feet of the subject property at least one week in advance of
demolition, grading, and construction activities.
B. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random
debris and trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner. The project site must
maintain and keep dust down by watering the site by use of a water truck, water
hose, street sweeping and other dust control and maintenance measures.
74
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 27
C. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number
and person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person
shall respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number
to call in complaints shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
D. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal
combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate
stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from
existing residences as possible.
E. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal
combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
F. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and
other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
G. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall
be located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and
noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
H. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are
imposed on construction activities, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to
4:00 pm. This condition applies to all heavy construction equipment that vibrates.
I. 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)
75
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 28
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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
(MM Noise-2)
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PERMIT CDDP21-03031
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 submitted to the Department of
Conservation and Development dated on March 15, 2022.
COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A
BUILDING PERMIT.
General Requirements:
57. 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 signage or
striping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation
Engineering Division of the Public Works Department.
Roadway Improvements (Windhover Way):
58. The Applicant shall remove existing curb and sidewalk and install a standard driveway
approach on Windhover Way to serve the project site. Driveway improvements and
conforms shall match existing gutter line and grade.
59. Any cracked and displaced curb, gutter, and sidewalk shall be removed and replaced
along the project frontage of Windhover Way. Concrete shall be saw cut prior to
76
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 29
removal. Existing lines and grade shall be maintained. New curb and gutter shall be
doweled into existing improvements.
Access to Adjoining Property:
Proof of Access
60. 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.
Encroachment Permit
61. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Public Works for construction
of driveways or other improvements within the right-of-way of Windhover Way.
Site Access
62. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved
site/development plan.
Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance:
63. The Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveway with
Windover Way in accordance with Chapter 82-18 “Sight Obstructions at Intersections” of
the County Ordinance Code. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide
sight distance at this intersection, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining
walls, or other obstructions proposed at this intersection shall be setback to ensure that
the sight line is clear of any obstructions.
Bicycle – Pedestrian Facilities:
Pedestrian Access
64. Curb ramps and driveways shall be designed and constructed in accordance with current
County standards. A detectable warning surface (e.g. truncated domes) shall be installed
on all curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the curb returns to
accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on
top of any curb ramp proposed.
Drainage Improvements:
77
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 30
Collect and Convey
65. The 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. The Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any
necessary improvements to off-site facilities.
Exception (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval)
The Applicant shall be permitted an exception to allow a diversion of stormwater
entering and/or originating on the subject property provided that the applicant verifies
the adequacy of the stormwater facility or natural watercourse to which the stormwater
shall be directed. If the off-site conveyance system, ultimate drainage facility or natural
watercourse to which stormwater is proposed to be diverted is inadequate, the applicant
shall be responsible for all costs related to the construction and/or right-of-way
acquisition related to any necessary improvements to make the system adequate.
Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements:
66. The Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with
the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards.
67. The Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and
driveway(s) in a concentrated manner.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES):
68. 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
78
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 31
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.
-Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain
markers.
-Shallow roadside and on-site swales.
-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.
-Filtering Inlets.
-The applicant shall sweep the paved portion of the site at least once a year between
September 1st and October 15th utilizing a vacuum type sweeper. Verification (invoices,
etc.) of the sweeping shall be provided to the County Clean Water Program
Administrative Assistant at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 (925) 313-2238).
-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 the Public Works
Department.
Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance:
69. 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 issuance of a
building permit. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP
and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant.
70. 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).
71. 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.
72. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the property owner(s) shall enter into a
Stormwater Management Facility Operation and Maintenance Agreement with Contra
79
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 32
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.
73. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
74. 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:
75. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 57 as
adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
80
BOS – March 26, 2024
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 33
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 may be subject to the requirements of the following agencies:
Department of Conservation and Development, Building Inspection Division
Contra Costa County Public Works Department
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
Contra Costa County Health Services Department
Contra Costa Water District
Mountain View Sanitary District
The applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to
continuing with the project.
C. The 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.
D. 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 Game Code.
E. 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.
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
1
Everett Louie
From:pamelawest wclands.com <pamelawest@wclands.com>
Sent:Monday, July 10, 2023 1:56 PM
To:Everett Louie
Cc:robertwest wclands.com
Subject:Re: CDDP21-03031 Environmental Document Initial Study Review and Mitigation Measures
Good afternoon,
Robert West and I have reviewed the documents listed above and agree with all the mitigation measures listed in the
Initial Study Review and Mitigation Measures document.
Thank you,
Pamela West
West Coast Land and Development, Inc.
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
(925) 246-2870
From: pamelawest wclands.com <pamelawest@wclands.com>
Date: Monday, July 10, 2023 at 11:48 AM
To: Everett Louie <Everett.Louie@dcd.cccounty.us>
Cc: robertwest wclands.com <robertwest@wclands.com>
Subject: Re: CDDP21‐03031 Environmental Document Initial Study Review and Mitigation Measures
Hello,
We have a couple of questions:
1. On our last project we were required to water the roadway “as needed” and sweep daily. To do as you suggest
would cost approximately $1,200 a day, or $300,000 ‐ $500,000 for the life of the project. That is far above our
budget. Can we water once a week and sweep daily?
2. There is a far more extensive holiday list than in every other city/county we are working in. Every holiday has a
huge impact on our timelines, budget and employees.
3. On page 10 it mentions a monitor for emissions, which would be very costly.
There are a few typos:
P, 10 #4 & #7 are extra
p. 46 section5, sb section 5
The word isle is used instead of aisle throughout the document
Thank you,
Pam
104
1
CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: Three-story, 24-unit Windhover Terrace Apartments
(County File #CDDP21-03031)
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:
Everett Louie, Project Planner
(925) 655-2873
4. Project Location: North of Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd. Intersection
Martinez, CA 94553
Assessor Parcel No. 380-220-066
5. Project Sponsor's Name and
Address:
West Coast Land and Development, Inc – Pamela West
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
6. General Plan Designation: Multiple-Family Residential-High Density (MH)
7. Zoning: Multiple-Family Residential (M-29)
8. Description of Project: The applicant is requesting approval of a of a Development Plan to construct
an approximately 22,247-square-foot in size, 24-unit apartment building on a vacant property. The
project includes two units for low-income households and one unit for very low-income households and
a request for a Density Bonus of two units for a total of 24 units.
The project consists of the following elements:
• Parking related improvements for 34 parking spaces with two ADA accessible spaces and four
electric vehicle charging spaces;
• Asphalt and permeable pavement;
• Landscaping would include 25 trees and numerous shrubs throughout the property for a total
of 6,600 square feet of landscaping. A new six-foot fence along the rear property line and a
six-foot decorative wall along the side property lines;
• Retaining walls along the rear of the property;
• Fire Hydrant;
• Six long-term bicycle storage lockers and two short-term bicycle storage spaces;
• A 13’-7” tall carport that will cover 16 spaces located on the east side of the parcel;
• A 8’-8”, Approx. 261 square foot trash enclosure structure;
• Four downward-oriented LED streetlight-style light to be located near the carport to provide
site security;
• Bioretention Facilities;
• Site preparation would include approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803 cubic yards
of fill for bioretention treatment facilities and to direct stormwater to off-site drainage
infrastructure;
105
2
• Curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements and driveway ramp would be constructed along the
project frontage on Windover Way;
• The project includes approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803 cubic yards of fill.
The project requests a Tree permit for the following:
• The removal of four code protected trees work within the dripline of three code protected trees.
The project requests the following variances:
• A 38-6” height (where 30’ is the maximum allowed);
• A 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required);
The project requests the following concessions and reduction in development standards:
• A density bonus concession to reduce the Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking
ratios;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(e) for reduced
parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces;
The project requests an exception:
• An exception to Division 914, Collect and Convey requirements.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Surrounding Area: This area along Windhover Way is exclusively occupied by residential development.
The adjacent parcels to the north and south host single family residences. To the east of the site is a 13-
unit townhouse development. The two properties to the west both host duplexes. Approximately 316
feet northeast is a 12-unit apartment complex. Beyond the immediate neighborhood, along Pacheco
Boulevard there are a variety of residential, commercial, and retail uses including multi-family housing,
restaurants, schools, storage locations, gas stations, auto repair shops, and other retail services. Parcels
within the City of Martinez jurisdiction are located approximately 1,100 feet to the east of the subject
parcel.
Subject Property: The subject lot is approximately 0.75-acres in size (approximately 32,820 square feet)
rectangular shaped parcel (with the addition of a 52’ x 70’ strip which extends to the west and connects
the parcel to Windhover Way as an access.) The parcel is located on the east side of Windhover Way,
approximately 125 feet north of the Pacheco Boulevard and Windhover Way intersection in the in the
Pacheco/Vine Hill area. The parcel is vacant and is largely covered with grass and dirt and has eight
trees located around the perimeter of the parcel. There is existing curb, sidewalk, streetlights, and
underground utilities along the frontage of Windhover Way. Public Works has reviewed the submittal
and has indicated that the applicant will not be required to perform further widening or frontage
improvements. The general topographic slope of the parcel trends downward from west to east. The
elevation starts at 40 feet above mean sea level at Windhover Way and slopes down to 31 feet above
mean sea level at the rear of the property. The site currently has access off of Windhover Way which
will continue to remain as the access point. The site contains eight trees consisting of London Plane,
Carolina Cherry Laurel, California Black Walnut, Glossy Privet, Olive and Siberian Elm.
106
3
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 Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa Fire Protection District
• Contra Costa County Health Services Department
• Contra Costa Water District
• Mt. View 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.?
A Notice of Opportunity to Request Consultation was sent on May 24, 2023, in accordance with section
21080.3.1 of the California Resources Code to the Wilton Rancheria and Confederated Villages of
Lisjan Nation, the two California Native American tribes that have requested notification of proposed
projects. Pursuant to section 21080.3.1(d), there is a 30-day time period for the Confederated Villages
of Lisjan and the Wilton Rancheria to either request or decline consultation in writing for this project.
Staff did not receive a request for consultation in response. Therefore, consultation with Native
American tribes has not occurred in relation to this project.
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Without mitigation, the environmental factors checked below would have been potentially affected by this
project. Upon incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the following pages it has been found that
the project will not result in any impacts to the environment.
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
107
4
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, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
_____________________________ ____________________
Everett Louie Date
Planner II
Contra Costa County
Department of Conservation & Development
Everett Louie 7/11/2023
108
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
5
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The Open Space Element of the County General Plan identifies
major scenic ridges and waterways within the County as shown in Figure 9-1. The project site
is located more than 3 miles to the east of the nearest scenic ridgeway. The subject property is
not located near a major scenic resource and will therefore have a less than significant adverse
effect on a scenic vista.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Figure 5-4 (Scenic Routes Plan) of the Contra Costa County
Transportation and Circulation Element identifies the roadways which form the Countywide
scenic routes plan. The project site is bounded by Pacheco Blvd to the south and Windhover
Way to the west. The nearest scenic highway is Highway 4 which is approximately 1.30 miles
to the south of the project site. Highway traffic is not visible from the site. Since the subject
property is not visible from a state scenic highway and is void of any structures (the project site
is vacant and covered in shrubs), the project would not substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The vacant property site is located within the Multiple-Family
Residential (M-29) zoning district. Generally speaking, the intent of the M-29 zoning district is
to provide for residential infill development at a density which is supportive of the surrounding
area. In general, the project has been designed pursuant to the guidelines for development
within the M-29 zoning district. The project has been designed to be compatible with the
existing residential development in the area, including orienting the main entrance towards the
Windhover Way frontage. Surrounding uses include single-family residences to the north and
south, a 13-unit townhouse development to the east and a 12-unit apartment complex to the
northeast. The project has been reviewed for compliance with the M-29 zoning district
109
DRAFT
6
standards, which included the review of the preliminary landscape design that has been
submitted with the application. The project proposes to enhance the scenic quality of the site,
turning it from a vacant lot with overgrown vegetation to an urban use with landscaping. The
final landscape plan must be reviewed by staff upon project approval and prior to applying for
building and/or grading permits. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable
zoning and/or other regulations governing scenic quality.
d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project site is located in an
urbanized area. However, the site itself is vacant and would introduce new lighting as part of
the project design. As required by the Off-Street Parking ordinance, the proposed project will
include the installation of four downward-oriented LED streetlight-style lights to be located
near the carport to illuminate the parking areas and to allow for safe circulation around the
subject property during times of low natural light. The applicant has submitted a preliminary
lighting plan that details the location and type of proposed exterior lighting. The lighting plan
indicates that the location of the lights will be minimally located near residences off-site.
Additionally, the potential for light spillover is limited due to the proposed landscaping which
includes trees, a new stone masonry fence and an existing wood fence. The following
mitigation measure shall ensure that all outdoor lighting is directed downward and positioned
away from adjacent properties and streets, reducing such impacts to a less than significant
level.
Potential Impact: Project lighting could spill off-site and result in a potentially significant
adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties.
Thus, the following mitigation measure would ensure such impacts from project lighting would
have a less than significant impact on nighttime views.
Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a
building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the
(CDD) for review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the
proposed light post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed
down and screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent
glare or excessive light spillover.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 9: Open Space Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30919/Ch9-Open-Space-
Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 5: Transportation and Circulation
Element,” 2005-2020.
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/30915/Ch5-Transportation-
and- Circulation-Element?bidId=
110
DRAFT
7
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES – 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 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?
SUMMARY:
a-e) No Impact: The project site is located within the Multiple-Family Residential (M-29) zoning
district. The parcel is within an “Urban and Built-Up Land” area as shown on the California
Department of Conservation’s Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2018 map. Neither the
subject property, nor those in the vicinity are zoned for agricultural use nor does the site contain
farmland designated “Prime”, “Unique”, or of “Statewide Importance”. The site is not under a
Williamson Act contract with the County. Additionally, the project site is not considered forest
land as defined by California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) or timberland as defined
by California Public Resources Code Section 4526. Development of a vacant lot that is not
being used for any agricultural use and turning it into a residential project would not involve
substantial changes to the existing urban environment. Furthermore, the project site is located
in an area of the County that is urbanized and contains uses which include residential,
commercial and mixed use. Therefore, the project will have no impact on agricultural or forest
resources, will not convert Prime Farmland, unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide
importance to a non-agricultural use, will not result in the conversion or loss of forest resources
and will not contribute indirectly to the conversion of adjacent farmland.
Sources of Information
• California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
111
DRAFT
8
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
3. AIR QUALITY – 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 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) Less Than Significant Impact: 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 and to protect
the climate through the reduction of criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases. The CEQA
Guidelines support lead agencies in analyzing air quality impacts. If, after analysis, the
project’s air quality impacts are found to be below the significant thresholds, then the air
quality impacts may be considered less than significant. The potential air quality impacts for
this project were evaluated using the BAAQMD 2017 CEQA guidelines screening criteria.
Pursuant to these guidelines, if a project does not exceed the screening criteria size it is
expected to result in less than significant impacts to air quality.
The operational criteria pollutant screening size for the land use type “Apartment, low-rise” is
240 dwelling units, and the construction-related screening size is 78 dwelling units. The
proposed 24 dwelling unit apartment complex is below the residential screening criteria for the
low-rise apartment complex for both operational (i.e., occupancy of the residential units) and
construction-related pollutants. Furthermore, the screening criteria developed by BAAQMD
generally represent new developments on greenfield sites. The proposed project is proximate to
regional transit service and is considered an infill project in the otherwise developed,
surrounding area of Martinez.
The County’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) is designed to reduce local greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions while improving community health consistency with the BAAQMD’s guidance on
preparing a qualified GHG reduction strategy and State assembly Bill (AB) 32 GHG reduction
targets. To assist staff and developers with implementation of the GHG reduction strategy, the
CAP includes a development checklist (Appendix E) with strategies for project consistency
with the CAP. Such strategies include the installation of high-efficiency appliances, insulation,
112
DRAFT
9
electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and locating new development within one half mile of a
BART, Amtrak, or bus station. Staff will recommend conditions of approval to require
verification by staff of the County Building Inspection (BID) and Community Development
Division (CDD) of the project’s compliance with Appendix E standards prior to issuance of
building permits. Therefore, the potential for the project to conflict with or obstruct
implementation of BAAQMD’s Clean Air plan or the County’s Climate Action Plan is less than
significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed above, the proposed 24-unit apartment complex is
less than the criteria pollutant screening size determined by the BAAQMD, and thus would not
result in significant emissions of criteria air pollutants during the construction period or during
project operation. In addition, by implementing the strategies of the County CAP to reduce
GHG emissions, the proposed project would not cause a violation of any air quality standard
and would not contribute substantially to any existing or projected air quality violation.
Although the proposed project would contribute incrementally to the level of criteria air
pollutants in the atmosphere, the project would have a less than significant impact on the level
of any criteria pollutant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project is not expected to
cause any localized emissions that could expose sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences,
schools) to unhealthy long-term air pollutant levels. Construction activities, however, would
result in localized emissions of dust and diesel exhaust that could result in temporary impacts to
nearby residences, schools, and businesses.
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 is required to implement the
following mitigation measures, which the BAAQMD recommends to reduce construction dust
and exhaust impacts to a less than significant impact.
Potential Impact: Future grading and construction activities on the project site would result in
localized emissions of dust, diesel exhaust, and combustion emissions that could result in
potential, if temporary, air quality impacts to sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences,
schools) from the project site during project construction.
Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1: The following mitigations shall be included on all
construction plans and implemented throughout the construction phase of the project:
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.
113
DRAFT
10
3. 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.
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 5 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. The property owner or site contractor shall 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.
9. Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-
inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
10. All contractors shall use equipment that meets the California Air Resources Board' s
(CARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.
Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce the impact on the sensitive receptors
during project construction to a less than significant level.
d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The BAAQMD’s 2017 CEQA
guidelines indicate that odor impacts can occur from two different situations: 1) siting a new
odor source, or 2) siting a new sensitive receptor (e.g., residents). Although not absolute,
screening level distances between sources and receptors are utilized by BAAQMD to identify
potentially significant impacts from malodors. Depending on the type of land use, the identified
screening distance is between one and two miles as shown on Table 3-3 of the CEQA
Guidelines. These distances are to be used in conjunction with available complaint history. For
example, any odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year, averaged over three
years, is considered to have a significant impact on receptors within the applicable screening
distance. Examples of land uses which may potentially generate significant odors include
wastewater treatment plants, landfills/composting stations, refineries, chemical plants, etc.
The project is not expected to result in other emissions, such as objectionable odors, that would
adversely affect a substantial number of people (objectionable odors are typically associated
with agricultural or heavy industrial land uses such as refineries, chemical plants, landfills,
sewage-treatment plants, etc.) during project operation. However, during construction and
grading, diesel powered vehicles and equipment used on site could create localized odors.
These odors would be temporary, but 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.
114
DRAFT
11
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 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2017.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District. “Spare the Air, Cool the Climate Final,
2017 Clean Air.” Adopted 19 April 2017.
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/plans/2017-clean-air-
plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en.
• Contra Costa County. “Climate Action Plan.” Adopted by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors on 15 December 2015.
http://www.co.contracosta.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/39791/Contra-Costa-County-
Climate-Action-Plan?bidId=.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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?
115
DRAFT
12
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The Conservation Element, Figure 8-1 indicates that the project
site is not located in a significant ecological area and according to the California Fish and
Wildlife Public Access Lands Map, the project site is not indicated to include an area of
wildlife or ecological reserve. The location of the project site is surrounded by commercial and
residential development and the site currently is vacant with weeds. The site lacks suitable
habitat (there are no creeks, wetlands, or riparian habitats located on the subject parcel.
Therefore, there will be a less than significant impact on any special status species.
b) No Impact: According to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Public
Access Lands map, the project site is not located in or adjacent to an area identified as a
wildlife or ecological reserve by the CDFW. According to the Significant Ecological Areas and
Selected Locations of Protected Wildlife and Plant Species Areas map (Figure 8-1) of the
County General Plan, the project site is not located in or adjacent to a significant ecological
resource area. In addition, the property contains no perennial or intermittent streams, creeks or
other riparian habitat – Vine Hill Creek is located approximately 900 feet southeast of the
subject property. Therefore, 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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
c) No Impact: Wetlands are defined and identified under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as
“areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Wetlands Inventory map, no wetlands are located at or adjacent to the project site.
Therefore, no substantial adverse effects on federally protected wetlands are expected to occur
as a result of this project.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site does not contain any creeks, wetlands, or
riparian habitats located on the subject parcel. It is also not identified in Figure 8-1 of the
Conservation Element as an area of significant ecological area or locations of protected wildlife
and plant species. As previously mentioned, the project site is a vacant lot surrounded by
multiple residential properties and commercial properties. The surrounding area has been
disturbed and developed. Therefore, the proposed development is expected to have a less than
significant impact on 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
nursery sites, based on existing site conditions and the surrounding land uses.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site has several trees that are located within the
parcel boundaries. Because the lot is vacant, the trees are currently protected per Chapter 816-6,
116
DRAFT
13
Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. The project would remove four code protected
trees and work within the dripline of three code protected trees for the construction of the 24-
unit apartment building and other various improvements. The applicant is applying for a tree
permit which is required prior to any work within the dripline of a code protected tree. The
applicant will be required to comply with the conditions of approval which require a tree
restitution bond and tree replanting plan. Therefore, as conditioned, the project will have a less
than significant impact to tree resources in the County does not conflict with tree preservation
policies for Contra Costa County.
f) No Impact: The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community
Conservation Plan (ECCC HCP/NCCP) was adopted by the County in October of 2006. The
purpose of this plan is to provide a framework to protect natural resources while streamlining
the environmental permitting process for impacts to covered special status species within the
rapidly expanding region of Eastern Contra Costa. The proposed project site is located outside
of the HCP/NCCP urban development area and thus HCP ordinance no. 2007-53 does not apply
to the project. Thus, the project would not conflict with any conservation plan.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 8: Conservation Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30918/Ch8-Conservation-
Element?bidId=
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife Lands. Public Access Lands Map.
Accessed May 28,2021. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/lands/
• Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Division 816 – Trees.
https://library.municode.com/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code?nodeId=T
IT8ZO_DIV816TR
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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:
a-c) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The Vacant parcel is not a
historical resource pursuant to Section 15065.5 of the CEQA Guidelines because:
117
DRAFT
14
1. It is not a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical
Resources Commission, for listening in the California Register of Historical
Resources;
2. It is not a resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in
section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in a
historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public
Resources Code; and
3. Has not been determined to be historically or culturally significant by a lead agency.
In addition, the California Historical Resource Information System, Northwest Information
Center (NWIC) has reviewed the project and determined that there is low possibility for the
occurrence of unrecorded archeological resources at the site. Thus, no further study of
archeological resources is recommended at this time. Additionally, figure 9-2 of the Open
Space Element of the General Plan designates the site as “largely urbanized”, which generally
means that there is a low probability for encountering archeological resources. The project site
is vacant and as such, there are no existing buildings that would be more than 45 years old. The
project consists of the construction of an apartment building. The construction work could
include trenching, grading and other subsurface work. The proposed project was reviewed by
the NWIC, Wilton Rancheria Cultural Preservation Department and Confederated Villages of
Lisjan Nation who did not provide any comments of concern. While the project was reviewed
by the NWIC and Tribes in the area, there is nevertheless a potential for previously unknown
cultural resources to be uncovered during the construction phase of the project.
Potential Impact: Although there is no evidence that there is any specific cultural resources
known in in the project area, there is nevertheless a potential for previously unknown cultural
resources to be uncovered during construction activities requiring excavation or earth
movement.
The following mitigation measure will ensure that in the event cultural resources are
discovered, the proper actions are taken to reduce the adverse environmental impacts to cultural
resources to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 1: The following measures shall be implemented during project-
related ground disturbance and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp
approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever
occurs first, the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed
below are included on the construction plans.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading, or
trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if they observe
any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural resource discovery (e.g., wood,
stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; deposits of
wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are
encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery
shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and, if
118
DRAFT
15
necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the County and
other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be mitigated.
Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be prepared
documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report should be submitted to
the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected
and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an archaeologist shall be
contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of a Native American origin, the
Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this
identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD) to inspect the property and provide recommendations for the proper
treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist should prepare a
report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for the treatment
of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in
coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report should be submitted to the
Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 9: Open Space Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30919/Ch9-Open-Space-
Element?bidId=
• California Department of Conservation. California Historical Resources.
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=7
• Contra Costa County Historic Resources Inventory (2019) - https://www.contracosta
.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1116/Historic-Resources-Inventory-HRI?bidId
• California Historical Resources Information System Letter Dated November 22, 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
119
DRAFT
16
a) Less Than Significant Impact: In December 2015, a Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted
by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in order to identify and achieve a reduction in
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by the year 2020 as mandated by the State under AB32. The
design and operation strategies set forth in the CAP for reducing GHG emissions include
measures such as installing energy efficient appliances that would also reduce the project’s
consumption of energy resources during operation. The residential project will be required to
comply with all California Code Title 24 (CalGreen) building energy efficiency standards for
an apartment residential building that are in effect at the time that building permit applications
are submitted, including any standards regarding the provision of solar energy. If approved, the
project will be reviewed under all current energy standards as part of the plan check process.
During the plan check process, the proposed development would be subject to the 2022
California Building Standards Code which would include compliance with the energy
conservation standards in the Energy Code Section and CalGreen Code Section of the 2022
California Building Standards Code. In addition, the project must also comply with the
County’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, which promotes efficient water use.
Compliance with all applicable regulations will ensure this development will not have a
significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy. During construction, the project may require temporary electrical power. The General
Contractor would be required to apply for a temporary power permit from the County and to
comply with all applicable building standards for a temporary power connection. Therefore, the
impact of construction or operation on electrical energy resources is anticipated to be less than
significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: As mentioned in subsection-a above, the residential project will
be required to comply with all California Code Title 24 (CalGreen) building energy efficiency
standards for an apartment residential building that are in effect at the time that building permit
applications are submitted, including any standards regarding the provision of solar energy. In
addition, the design and operation strategies set forth in Table E.1 Standards for CAP
Consistency – New Development (Appendix E of the County’s CAP) include measures such as
installing energy efficient appliances that would also reduce the project’s consumption of
energy resources. Therefore, the project will not conflict with a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency.
Sources of Information
• California Air Resources Board, Assembly Bill 32 Overview
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm
• California Energy Commission 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2022standards/
• Climate Action Plan, Contra Costa County, 2015
120
DRAFT
17
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) i) Less Than Significant Impact: The California Division of Mines and Geology’s Special
Publication 42 indicates that the State Geologist is required to delineate “Earthquake Fault
Zones” (EFZs) along known active faults in California. The project site is not mapped within
an EFZ, nor within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The nearest fault considered active
by the CGS is the Concord fault, which passes more than 10.000 feet east of the site. Because
the site is not within an official Earthquake Fault Zone, the risk of fault rupture is generally
regarded as very low.
ii) Less Than Significant Impact: The U.S. Geological Survey (2016) indicates that there is a 72
percent chance of at least one magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake striking the San Francisco
Bay region between 2014 and 2043. With that, the County General Plan Safety Element
121
DRAFT
18
identifies areas that are more or less susceptible to seismic damage as shown in Figure 10-4
Estimated seismic Ground Response. According to Figure 10-4 of the Safety Element, the
property is located on Hard Bedrock which has the lowest damage susceptibility. The risk of
structural damage from ground shaking is regulated by the building code and the County
Grading Ordinance. Codes are intended to keep earthquake risks to an acceptable minimum,
and they assume that the ground is stable. Ground failure can result in greater damage.
Nevertheless, compliance with the operative provisions of the California Building Code (CBC)
along with (i) compliance with the County Grading Ordinance (ii) conservative design and (iii)
quality construction are the best means of controlling the life loss and damage potential of
earthquakes. Current CBC (2022) requires the use of seismic parameters in the design of all
structures requiring building permits. These parameters are based on soil profile types and
proximity of faults deemed capable of generating strong/violent earthquake shaking. Design
level geotechnical reports routinely provide CBC seismic design parameters, and upon
implementation of the mitigations below, adverse effects due to strong seismic ground shaking
would be reduced to a less than significant level.
iii) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The Safety Element (Figure
10-5 Estimated Liquefaction Potential) of the County General Plan divides lands within the
County into three liquefaction potential categories: generally high, generally moderate to low,
and generally low. It is used as a “screening criteria” during the processing of land development
applications, on a project-by-project basis. By intent, the map is conservative on the side of
safety. The project site is entirely or chiefly in an area classified as generally high liquefaction
potential. As a result, the project applicant submitted a Geology study that was peer reviewed
by the County geologist, Darwin Myers Associate (DMA). The Geology report prepared by
GEC Consultants confirmed that the soils are known to be expansive and corrosive and
identified undocumented fill on site as an issue of drainage.
The County Peer Review Geologist (DMA) reviewed the report by GEC Consultants and
concluded that the report of GEC Consultants sufficient to define the geotechnical hazards and
to identify mitigation measures. DMA recommends that an updated report be provided prior to
issuance of grading or building permits. The focus of the updated report shall be to address the
following potential hazards, expansive soils, corrosive soils, siting and design of any required
bio-retention facilities and/or other measures that may be recommended to achieve compliance
with the clean water requirements of the RWQCB, possible presence of existing undocumented
fills and provide seismic parameters based on the California Building Code. Thus, the applicant
is required to implement the following mitigation measures:
Potential Impact: The project site is within an area where soils are known to be expansive and
may be corrosive. Additionally, the geotechnical report prepared by GEC Consultants identified
the presence of undocumented fill on the site. Accordingly, staff recommends that the
following mitigation measures be incorporated as part of the project to reduce the potential
hazards resulting from corrosive soils and other onsite conditions to a less than significant
level.
122
DRAFT
19
Mitigation Measure Geology 1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a
building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall
submit a geotechnical report update with the geotechnical review fee in the amount of $3,000,
referencing the proposed grading, drainage and foundation plans and providing specific criteria
and standards for site grading, drainage and foundation design based on adequate subsurface
data, laboratory testing of samples and engineering analysis. The scope of the geotechnical
investigation shall address the following potential hazards: (i) expansive soils, (ii) corrosive
soils, (iii) siting and design of any required bio-retention facilities and/or other measures that
may be recommended to achieve compliance with the clean water requirements of the
RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing undocumented fills and effective measures to
control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v) provide seismic parameters based on the adopted
California Building Code at the time that a residential building permit is requested.
Mitigation Measure Geology 2: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a
building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the geotechnical report
update required by Geology 1, above, shall be subject to review by the County’s peer review
geologist, and review/approval of the CDD. Improvement, grading and building plans shall
carry out the recommendations of the approved report.
iv) Less Than Significant Impact: In 1975, the USGS issued photo-interpretation maps of
landslides and other surficial deposits in Contra Costa County (that mapping is presented on
Page 10-6 in the Safety Element of the County’s General Plan). According to this map, which
was prepared by an experienced USGS geologist, the project site is in an area that is not known
to have landslides. The County GIS Accela tool also does not identify the site as an area with
the possibility of having a landslide. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a less than
significant impact for potential of landslides for this site.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Any areas that are disturbed during construction of the project
would be covered by the proposed improvements or landscaping. Since all areas of the property
that will be disturbed will be covered by new structures, pervious and impervious surfaces, or
landscaping, the potential for soil erosion or loss of topsoil is less than significant. Additionally,
a routine provision for grading permits in Contra Costa County is a requirement for submittal of
an erosion control plan. This plan is subject to technical review by inspectors of the County
Grading Section. Normally there are refinements to erosion control plans as the winter rainy
season approaches. Additional details are included in the refined erosion control plan, including
such items as provisions for (a) storage of extra erosion control materials on site and (b)
monitoring of the performance of disturbed areas on the site during/immediately following
significant rainstorms. If erosion control facilities are damaged or failing to perform as
intended, the erosion control measures being implemented on the site are refined to correct the
deficiency. Implementation of an erosion control plan would further ensure that the project
results in less than significant impacts due to erosion or the loss of topsoil.
c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The geotechnical report prepared
by GEC Consultants confirmed that the project site is within an area where the soils are known
to be expansive and may be corrosive. Additionally, the report confirmed the presence of
123
DRAFT
20
undocumented fill on the site and they identified drainage as a concern. GEC recommended
that the drainage should be carefully controlled in the vicinity of the proposed structures and
that the undocumented fill must be over-excavated and either (i) incorporated into engineered
fill or (ii) if the existing fill contains materials unsuitable for use in an engineered fill, that fill
material shall be removed from the site and taken to a suitable facility for disposal. The
County’s Peer Review Geologist is concerned that the report was not adequate for the issuance
of construction permits without a report update.
Potential Impact: The project contains soils that are known to be expansive and may be
corrosive. With the addition of undocumented fill, there is potentially significant impact for the
project to be located on unstable soil that is not suitable for supporting the proposed
improvements. Accordingly, staff recommends that mitigation measures be incorporated as part
of the project to reduce the potential hazards resulting from undocumented fill and to perform
corrosion potential testing of the graded building pad.
Mitigation Measure Geology 3: Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of
foundation-related work) the project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential
testing of the graded building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid
damage to improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel).
Mitigation Measure Geology 4: The geotechnical report required by Geology 1 routinely
includes recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction.
These services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer
to (i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed conditions
during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the basis of the design
recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the opportunity for field
modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID approval), based on exposed
conditions. The monitoring shall commence during clearing, and extend through grading,
including testing services during placement of engineered fill, installation of recommended
drainage facilities, and foundation related work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final”
grading inspection, pending submittal of a report from the project geotechnical engineer that
documents their observation and testing services during grading, installation of drainage
improvements.
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the apartment
building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer documenting the
monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-related geotechnical
recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier hole drilling/ foundation
preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g. collection of roof gutter runoff in
a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable discharge point; and possibly installation of a
subdrain system around the perimeter of the foundation to control moisture beneath the
foundation).
124
DRAFT
21
d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The soil series that occurs at the
site is known to be expansive and may be corrosive. Expansive soils expand when water is
added and shrink when they dry out. This continuous change in soil volume can cause
structures to move unevenly and crack. Corrosive soils tend to damage concrete and/or
uncoated steel that is in contact with the ground. Geotechnical design criteria are needed to
avoid/ minimize damage from these adverse soil conditions. A first step is to test the soils to
confirm / modify the Soil Survey’s preliminary assessment. In the case of corrosion potential,
the soil testing can determine if the soils are corrosive to either steel; or concrete; or to both
steel and concrete. The results of that testing can serve to alert the developer and their
development consultants (e.g., underground contractor, foundation contractor) of this hazard.
The underground contactors can either consider the testing performed to be adequate and act on
the results of testing; or they can perform supplemental testing to provide a more complete
assessment of this hazard.
Potential Impact: As discussed in Section 6(a)(iii) above, the available information indicates a
significant risk of damage to structures / improvements due to these adverse soil conditions.
Consequently, the applicant is required to implement the following mitigation measure.
Mitigation Measure Geology 5: All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during
the dry season (April 15 through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be
revegetated to minimize erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion
control work shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved
by the Building Inspection Division.
e) No Impact: The subject property is within an area served by the Mt. View Sanitary District.
The proposed development will be connected to the existing public sewer service. The Sanitary
District has reviewed the project and has indicated that they would review the sewer
improvement plans. There will be no septic system within the project.
f) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: There are no known
paleontological resources located at the project site nor have any unique geological features
been identified. Nevertheless, there is always the potential for ground disturbing activity to
reveal previously undocumented features. Implementing the mitigation below ensures the
project will not significantly impact any such resource that may be uncovered by construction
activity at the project site.
Potential Impact: Ground disturbance during the project’s construction phase has the potential
for disturbing previously unknown unique paleontological resources. In addition to the
mitigation measures for Cultural Resources, the following mitigation measures will ensure that
in the event unique paleontological resources are discovered, the proper actions are taken to
reduce the adverse environmental impacts to unique paleontological resources to a less than
significant level.
Mitigation Measure Geology 6: Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during
grading, trenching, or other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials
shall be stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
125
DRAFT
22
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and, if
deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s).
Sources of Information
• California Building Code, 2022.
• California Division of Mines and Geology - Special Publication 42.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/Special-
Publications/SP_042.pdf
• California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Map.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 10: Safety Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30920/Ch10-Safety-
Element?bidId=
• United States Geologic Survey. Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region
2014-2043. August, 2016. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf
• United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Web Soil Survey Map.
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
• Darwin Myers Associates. “Geologic Peer Review – CDDP21-0303,” Dated November
19. 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed in the Air Quality section of this study, the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) adopted the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan
that, in addition to various criteria air pollutants, addresses GHG emissions at a regional scale.
The project includes a new 24-unit apartment building. The screening criteria are not thresholds
of significance but were developed to provide a conservative indication of whether a proposed
project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts. Pursuant to these guidelines,
the potential for apartment style buildings would be 78 low-rise apartment dwellings. The
project is much lower than the threshold as it proposes 24-units. While the project would
generate some GHG emissions, the project’s global climate change is less than “cumulatively
considerable’ because the project does not exceed applicable screening criteria, as described
126
DRAFT
23
above. Thus, it can be assumed that the project will have a less than significant impact on the
environment regarding greenhouse gas emissions.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Within the 2017 Clean Air Plan is an ambitious GHG reduction
target to reduce Bay Area GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050. The
2017 control strategy includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors –
reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) – and reduce transport of ozone and
its precursors to neighboring air basins. In addition, the plan builds upon and enhances
BAAQMD’s efforts to reduce emissions of fine particulate matter and toxic air contaminants.
BAAQMD’s approach to developing a threshold of significance for GHG emissions is to
identify emissions level for which a project would not be expected to substantially conflict with
existing California legislation adopted to reduce statewide GHG emissions. For land use
development projects, the threshold is 1,100 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e. If a project
would generate GHG levels above the threshold, it would be considered to contribute
substantially to a cumulative impact and would be considered significant. The emissions
generated as a result of the operational activities of the proposed 24-unit apartment complex
will be far less than the significance threshold and will not result in significant levels of GHG
that will conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to the reduction of
GHG. There may be some increase in greenhouse gases as a result of the project, but they
would be considered less than significant due to the temporary nature of the construction phase
of the project as the project will be required to incorporate energy efficiency measures from the
current Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Code and comply with the CalGreen /
Construction & Demolition (C&D) Debris Recovery Program.
Sources of Information
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2017.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
• Contra Costa County. “Climate Action Plan.” Adopted by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors on 15 December 2015. http://www.co.contracosta.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/39791/Contra-Costa-County-Climate-Action- lan?bidId=.
127
DRAFT
24
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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-b) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project consists of constructing a new 24-unit
apartment complex. The proposed improvements and overall project site will be utilized for
residential-related improvements and activities. Although small quantities of commercially
available hazardous materials may be used for household or common-area cleaning or for
landscape maintenance, these materials would not be used in sufficient quantities to pose a
threat to human or environmental health.
The use of fuels and lubricants, paints, and other construction materials would occur during the
construction phase of the project. However, 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 result in a less than significant impact
from construction activities.
128
DRAFT
25
Therefore, the potential for impacts associated with handling, storing, and dispensing of
hazardous materials, or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving
the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment from project construction or
operation would be less than significant.
Staff utilized EnviroStor from the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s data system and
the tracking system determined that the site is not a site of hazardous waste. No evidence
reviewed by staff suggests that the project would be located on a site with hazardous materials
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, a less than significant impact is
expected.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The Las Juntas Elementary School is located approximately 970
feet east while Morello Park Elementary School is located approximately 2684 feet south of the
project site. However, due to the proposed use of the building (24-unit apartment), impacts on
either school from hazardous substances emitting from the project site, post construction,
would be less than significant. No evidence reviewed by staff suggests that the project would
include foreseeable conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the
environment. The use of construction-related fuels and lubricants, paints, and other
construction materials, during the construction period, would occur in accordance with
applicable federal, state, and local laws, including California Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (Cal/OSHA) requirements. Therefore, the potential impacts from the project to
emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste, is considered to be less than significant.
d) No Impact: The California Environmental Protection Agency maintains an updated list of
Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites (Cortese List). The subject property is not listed on the
Cortese List and is not categorized as a hazardous materials site. Therefore, the project will
have no impact in this respect.
e) No Impact: The project is not located within the vicinity of any public airport or public use
airport and will not conflict with an airport land use plan. The nearest airport facility to the
project site is the Buchanan Field airport, which is approximately 2 miles southeast of the
project site. Thus, the proposed project would not present any safety hazard to airports or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.
f) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject site fronts Windhover Way, which connects to
Pacheco Boulevard, both are County maintained roads. Windhover Way along the project
frontage is approximately 36-foot-wide street within a 56-foot right-of-way. There are existing
curbs, sidewalk, streetlights, and underground utilities along the frontage. No further widening
or frontage improvements are necessary with this development. The project will build a
driveway that will connect to Windhover Way from the interior parking lot. The proposed
project will not impact any existing communication/utility structures such as power poles or
telecommunications towers which may be necessary for an existing emergency response or
evacuation plan. Although project construction would primarily occur onsite, the required water
main extensions may require temporary road closures or reduced lanes. Additionally, in the
event that the alternative drainage plan would be necessary, extension of a new storm drain
129
DRAFT
26
pipe may require temporary or partial road closures. The nature and duration of those road
closures would be subject to review by the County Public Works Department for compliance
with applicable transportation regulations and require issuance of an encroachment permit.
It should also be noted that the project was referred to the Contra Costa County Fire Protection
District requesting comments. In a returned letter dated November 15, 2021, the Fire Protection
District is requiring the applicant submit construction plans for review. All construction plans
will be subject to the review of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District for consistency
with applicable Fire Code that is in effect at the time when the application for a building permit
is submitted. Therefore, the routing review of construction plans will ensure that final
construction plans will not result in a condition with inadequate emergency vehicle access.
Accordingly, the project would have a less than significant impact on emergency response and
emergency evacuation plans.
g) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is characterized as “urban unzoned” on the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map for
local responsibility areas and thus, would not be considered to have a high hazard risk due to
wildfires. The nearest High Fire Zone in Local Responsibility Area is over 2,000 feet north of
the project site while the nearest High Fire Zone in State Responsibility Area is over 2 miles
west. The project site is in a developed area within the service area of the Contra Costa County
Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). Development projects are generally referred to the Fire
District for review and comment to ensure that the proposal does not conflict with applicable
fire codes. There was no indication from the CCCFPD review of the project that the proposed
development poses a significant fire risk. Based on their review, the project proponent will be
required to provide construction plans to the fire district for review and approval. The plans
shall meet the 2022 California Building Code, 2022 California Residential Code and the
applicable California Fire Code. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact of indirect
risk of exposing people to loss, injury, or death involving wildland fire.
Sources of Information
• California Department of Public Health FAQs About Asbestos in the Home and
Workplace, 2017.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/CDPH%20Docume
nt%20Library/AsbestosFactSheet_201711_final-ADA.pdf
• California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor. Hazardous Waste and
Substances Site List. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp
• California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment
Program. Contra Costa County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA, 2009.
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf
• California Building Standards Commission. “2022 California Fire Code, California
Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9.” Accessed in 2023.
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAFC2022P1/california-code-of-regulations-title-24.
• California State Geoportal. “California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer.” Accessed
in 202. https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414.
130
DRAFT
27
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “CCCFPD Project No.:P-2021-05611.”
Dated November 15, 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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?
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed development is residential in nature, and will
not consist of any manufacturing, processing, industrial, or other commercial activities
which would generate by-products or waste that would pose a significant risk for impacting
water quality or waste discharge requirements within the County. The project site is located
within the service of the MT. View Sanitary District service area and will have access to
public sewage disposal services. A Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) is required for
applications that will create and/or redevelop impervious surface area exceeding 10,000
square feet (5,000 square feet for projects that include parking lots, restaurants, automotive
service facilities and gas stations), 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
131
DRAFT
28
(NPDES) Permit. The proposed development is residential in nature, and will not consist of
any manufacturing, processing, industrial, or other commercial activities which would
generate by-products or waste that would pose a significant risk for impacting water quality
or waste discharge requirements within the County. The project includes approximately
23,790 square feet of impervious surface (including the building and parking area), which
is above the threshold for requiring submittal of a SWCP. The applicant submitted a
preliminary Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) for the proposed stormwater management
facilities and controls as required by the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge
Control Ordinance. The SWCP submitted by the applicant has been deemed “preliminarily
complete” by the County’s Public Works Department for the purposes of this phase of
project review. Subsequent revisions and a final SWCP will be required as the project
proceeds through the design and construction process.
The project is not expected to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality because
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, long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water
Program for the site's stormwater drainage.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is within the Contra Costa Water District
(CCWD) service area. Since the project proposes to utilize a public water supply, no
groundwater wells would be required. Pursuant to a letter from CCWD, the proposed
development will require a fire service, a domestic service and an irrigation service for the
landscaping. CCWD recommended that the applicant submit plans to the water district for
review and approval. The project also plans to install up to four bioretention areas that would
help facilitate groundwater recharge and help offset the increased impervious surface area on
the project site. Therefore, there is less than significant potential for the project to substantially
decrease groundwater supplies, interfere with groundwater recharge, or impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin.
c)
i, ii, iii
Less Than Significant Impact: 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. A preliminary stormwater
control plan was prepared by CALICHI Design Group which indicated that the storm drain
improvements for this development would direct drainage to the frontage of Windhover Way.
The applicant will construct retaining walls along the east and south property lines to eliminate
132
DRAFT
29
the current surface discharge of water to adjacent properties. The Contra Costa County Public
Works Department has reviewed the drainage pattern at 98 Windhover Way and found no
evidence that the property currently drains onto the vacant parcel at APN 380-220-066. The
County elevation date contours imply that stormwater should natural drain southeast from 98
Winhover Way, avoiding the proposed project parcel.
Additionally, the site proposed drainage upgrades to prevent any off-site drainage. The property
slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner, away and considerably below street
grade. The applicant proposes to install a bioretention facility onsite which discharges to an
existing 18” storm drain in Windhover Way, effectively diverting the onsite flows. The
applicant has requested an exception to Division 914 of the County Ordinance per section 92-
6.002 of the County Ordinance Code. Further, analysis of the project by the Contra Costa
County Public Works Department determined that the applicant shall be permitted an exception
from the collect and convey requirements of the County Ordinance Code and will be allowed to
discharge to an existing storm drain provided that the applicant submit a drainage report to
verify the adequacy of the downstream drainage system. The applicant will be required to
submit a report verifying the adequacy of the stormwater facility or natural watercourse to
which the stormwater shall be directed (and to ensure that the system is adequate).
d) No Impact: Seiche, tsunami, and mudflow events are generally associated with large bodies or
large flows of water. The project site is not located within a 100-year or 500-year flood plain as
designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map.
According to the Safety Element of the County General Plan, the project site is not located in a
hazard zone for mudflows. A seiche is a water wave in a standing body of water such as a large
lake or reservoir that is caused by an earthquake, a major landslide, or strong winds. This
hazard does not exist within the Martinez area as there are no large lakes or reservoirs in the
area. As such, there would be no risk of pollutants being released from the site due to
inundation through flooding, tsunamis, mudflows, or seiche, therefore, there would be no
impact in this regard.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not expected to violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality because 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, long term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program
for the site's stormwater drainage. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant
impact on the implementation of an adopted water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa Clean Water Program, C3 Guidance: Development,
https://www.cccleanwater.org/construction-business/development
133
DRAFT
30
• Contra Costa County Public Works CDP21-03031 Staff Report & Recommended
Conditions of Approval dated December 19, 2022.
• Contra Costa County Tsunami Hazard Areas, California Department of Conservation,
2021. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/contra-costa
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Safety Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30920/Ch10-Safety-
Element?bidId=
• CALICHI DESIGN GROUP. “Stormwater Control Plan for DP21-3031).” Dated
February 15, 2022.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
SUMMARY:
a) No Impact: The subject property is currently vacant lot within a developed, urban area of the
Martinez area in unincorporated Contra Costa County. Existing land uses in the vicinity
primary consists of single-family residential development and related uses such as churches,
schools, convenience stores, apartment buildings and townhouses. The project site is
approximately 0.75 acres in area and is not large enough to constitute an independent
established “community” within its boundaries. Furthermore, the proposed project does not
consist of a new roadway, wall structure, or other improvements that would physically divide,
or impede or disrupt the manner in which people enter and exit the Martinez area and the
Windhover/Pacheco area in general. Due to the mixed-use zoning of the project vicinity, the
proposed development would not divide an established community.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The applicant is requesting approval of a of a Development Plan
to construct an approximately 22,247-square-foot in size, 24-unit apartment building, construct
a covered carport for 16 parking spaces, and to install of associated improvements (e.g.,
pavement, utilities, stormwater conveyance) on a vacant property. The project includes a Tree
Permit for the removal of four code protected trees within the dripline of three code protected
trees. The project includes two units for low-income households and one unit for very low-
income households and a request for a Density Bonus of two units for a total of 24 units.
Land Use Element
The project site is located within the Multiple-Family Residential High Density (MH) General
Plan Land Use designation. Generally speaking, the intent of the MH designation is to allow for
134
DRAFT
31
residential uses such as apartments, condominiums, town houses and auxiliary uses such as
churches.
The proposed project would construct a 24-unit apartment complex on a parcel intended for
High Density residential uses. The proposed apartment development will be residential in
nature, and as a result will be compatible with other residential uses that surround the site.
Within this designation, the General Plan allows for 22.0 to 29.9 multiple-family units per net
acre. Thus, as proposed the multi-family project is consistent with the Contra Costa County
General Plan development guidelines for the MH land use designation.
General Plan Policies for the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard Area
The project site is located within the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard area. As such, the following
general plan policies for this area are applicable to the project and the project is consistent with
these policies.
• Policy 3-105: The scenic assets and unstable slopes of the Vine Hill Ridge are to be protected
for open space/agricultural use.
The proposed project is not located on or near Vine Hill Ridge. Therefore, the project will not
impact the open space/agricultural use of that area.
• Policy 3-106: The residential neighborhood east of I-680 shall be buffered from the
industrial/landfill-related uses.
The project parcel is located west of I-680, therefore this policy does not apply to the project.
• Policy 3-107: Approximately 40 acres of land south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
tracks, between Morello and Pacheco, is designated Agricultural Lands, to encourage the
continued operation of the Viano family vineyards and winery.
The project parcel is not located within the land designated in the policy. The project parcel is
over 1,500 feet northeast of the Viano family vineyards and winery. Therefore, the project will
not conflict with this policy.
Housing Element
A component of preparing the County’s Housing Element for the General Plan is the
identification of vacant and underutilized suits suitable for residential development, and an
evaluation of the housing development potential of these sites in fulfilling the County’s share of
the regional housing needs as determined by the Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG).
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 Number 380-220-066 is not
among the parcels listed in the inventory of residential sites which were relied upon to meet the
135
DRAFT
32
County’s share of regional housing needs. Nevertheless, the project includes a total of 24
residential units. The project includes one-bedroom and two-bedroom units. These unit types
will increase housing opportunities for different size households for different income
categories. As previously stated, this project maximizes the housing density and development
of the site and includes a density bonus of nine percent above the base unit density for the site.
Therefore, the project will contribute towards the regional housing need for the County and
provide needed housing units for the region.
Zoning
The subject property is within the M-29 Multiple Family Residential (M-29) Zoning district.
County Code 84-26.402 – Uses – Permitted (3) states that Multiple family buildings, but not
including motels or hotels, is permitted use. Therefore, the proposed project is a permitted use
within the M-29 Zoning. With the included variances and concessions pursuant to Government
Code Section 65915(e), the application is consistent with the districts’ development standards
and the County Zoning Ordinance. The district’s zoning development standards dictate
allowable development in the area. The project would require two variances from these
standards, building height and reduced driveway aisle width and would utilize the Density
Bonus Request to request a concession to reduce the open space requirement and a reduction
for parking stall size, parking setback and total number of covered parking spaces.
The variance request for increased building height and parking aisle width would be consistent
with the intent of the zoning district and are necessary given the project site’s constraints. The
variance for building height is a result of the necessary lot padding that is required for drainage
to be directed to Windhover Way as the lot is lower by almost 6 feet at the rear of the property.
The added fill raises the height of the building from 34’ to 38’-6”. The reduced parking isle
widths allows for the project allow the project to have more parking spaces and an aisle for
vehicles to navigate. The reduction in parking aisle space allows for more maneuverability and
to accommodate additional parking spaces. With the project proposing to meet the minimum
landscape coverage, the driveway aisle space had to be reduced to accommodate this feature.
With just a small reduction in the driveway aisle width, the project can provide more parking
spaces and landscape area.
The project requests the following concessions, reduction in development standards, and
exception:
• A density bonus concession to reduce the Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking
ratios;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(e) for reduced
parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces;
• An exception to Division 914, Collect and Convey requirements.
136
DRAFT
33
The project is subject to Chapter 822-4, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and the applicant
is required to constrict 3.3 inclusionary units. The applicant has submitted an Inclusionary
Housing Plan, which proposes to construct and rent three inclusionary units. Two units will be
available to “lower-income households,” and one will be available to a “very low-income
household.”
Although the project consists of requests for variances to allow for an increased maximum
height and driveway aisle width, reduction in development standards to allow for reduced
parking stall size, parking setbacks and total number of covered parking spaces, concessions to
reduce the Open Space requirement, and an exception to the collect and convey drainage
requirements the project substantially conforms to the design guidelines and General Plan
Policies for the Martinez area as well as other General Plan policies and goals for
unincorporated Contra Costa County. Therefore, the project has a less than significant potential
for conflicting with any applicable land use, policy, General Plan, Specific Plan, or zoning
ordinance adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Land Use Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County Municipal Code. Title 8. https://library.municode.com
/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code?nodeId=TIT8ZO
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a-b) No Impact: Pursuant to Figure 8-4 (Mineral Resource Areas) of the County General Plan
Conservation Element, the project site is not located within any area of the County identified as
a significant mineral resource area. No known mineral resources have been identified in the
project vicinity, and there is no reason to believe that they exist at the project site. Therefore,
the project would not 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 and would not impact any mineral
resource recovery site.
Sources of Information
137
DRAFT
34
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Conservation Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30918/Ch8-Conservation-
Element?bidId=
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
13. NOISE – Would the project:
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) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The subject property fronts
Windhover Way. The project site is within an area of Martinez that is generally used for mixed
use including residential, commercial and light industrial. Figure 11-5C of the Noise Element
of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020, identifies that the subject property is
within an area of the County where 2005 DNL and CNEL Noise levels range above 60 decibels
(dB). Although Contra Costa County’s threshold for residential uses is a DNL of 60dB as
shown on Figure 11-6 (Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments) of the
County General Plan’s Noise Element, the County requires new multiple-family residential
projects to have an interior standard of 45dBA DNL or less. To evaluate the noise levels of the
proposed project, a noise study was prepared by Michael Thill of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.
A noise monitoring survey was conducted to quantify the existing noise environment at the site
between Wednesday, April 27, 2022 and Friday, April 29, 2022. The noise monitoring survey
included two long-term noise measurements (LT-1 and LT-2) and three short-term noise
measurements (ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3), as showing in Figure 1. All noise measurements were
conducted with Larson Davis Laboratories Model LxT1 Sound Level Meters fitted with ½-inch
pre-polarized condenser microphones and windscreens. The meters were calibrated with a
Larson Davis Model CAL200 precision acoustic calibrator prior to and following the
measurement survey. The internal clocks of the sound level meters were synchronized to ensure
138
DRAFT
35
both identical sound level response and simultaneous operation. As shown in Figure 1 below,
noise level measurements were taken in five areas within the subject property to determine the
difference in noise levels. The surveys were conducted at elevated positions (e.g., 12 feet above
the existing grade) to simulate noise exposure levels at the ground floor and second floors of
the proposed apartment building.
According to the study, traffic along Pacheco Boulevard was the predominant noise source at
these locations. Table 3 summarizes the noise measurement results.
The future noise environment at the project site will continue to result primarily from vehicle
traffic along Pacheco Boulevard. An increase in traffic volumes along Pacheco Boulevard
would correlate to an increase in noise levels at the project site. The Martinez General Plan
Update forecasts a traffic noise level increase of 1 dBA Ldn along the adjacent segment of
Pacheco Boulevard by the year 2040, with the future Ldn projected to reach 71 dBA at 75 feet
from the roadway centerline.
139
DRAFT
36
Common outdoor us areas are proposed along the south and east boundaries of the site. Existing
noise levels measured in these areas ranged from 55 to 59 dBA Ldn. By 2040, the unmitigated
noise level would be expected to increase by 1 dBA Ldn and would range from 56 to 60 dBA
Ldn. The project also proposes the construction of a 6-foot masonry wall along the south
boundary of the site that would provide additional noise reduction. Therefore, future exterior
noise levels would be less than 60 dBA Ldn and within the “normally acceptable” noise and
land use compatibility range identified for residential land uses.
Potential Impact: As shown on Figure 11-5 O of the Noise Element, the subject property is
within an area of the County that is identified as having nose levels range above 60 decibels.
The introduction of a new residential apartment building could introduce new noise sources
including temporary noise from construction activities. There may be periods of time where
there would be loud noise generated from the construction equipment, vehicles, and tools that
would impact nearby residences and businesses. Additionally, outdoor-to-indoor noise may also
be present due to the location of the project in close proximity to residences and Pacheco
boulevard. Thus, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented.
Mitigation Measure Noise 1: All windows and doors shall have the minimum ratings STC 26
and mechanical ventilation installed for the building.
Mitigation Measure Noise 2: The following construction restrictions shall be implemented
during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp
approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the
applicant shall provide evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are included
on the face of the construction plans.
1. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to
adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all project-related
contractors. The applicant shall notify neighbors within 300 feet of the subject property at
least one week in advance of demolition, grading, and construction activities.
2. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random debris and
trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner. The project site must maintain and keep dust
down by watering the site by use of a water truck, water hose, street sweeping and other dust
control and maintenance measures.
3. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number and person
to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number to call in complaints shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
4. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion
engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-
generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences as
possible.
5. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion
engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
140
DRAFT
37
6. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other
stationary noise sources where technology exists.
7. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall be located to
create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-sensitive receptors
nearest the project site.
8. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are imposed on
construction activities, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. This condition
applies to all heavy construction equipment that vibrates.
9. 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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
Complying with Noise 1 and Noise 2 will reduce interior noise levels to a level below the
County’s interior standard of 45 dBA DNL and will reduce the amount of construction
generated noise during project construction stages. By incorporating mitigation measures Noise
1 and Noise 2, the project shall have a less than significant impact on temporary or permanent
increases in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site, and the project will
substantially comply with the Noise Element of the County’s General Plan.
b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project for a 24-unit
is a type of use that will not consist of any manufacturing, processing, or other activities that
would typically result in excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise would be
141
DRAFT
38
temporary in nature and would be limited to the restricted construction hours as typically
conditioned for development permits approved by the County. These groundborne vibrations
would be temporary in duration, however, nearby residences, business, and/or schools may be
affected. Nevertheless, implementation of mitigation measure Noise 2 will reduce potential
project impacts (that would result in the generation of groundborne vibration or noise to less
than significant levels.
c) No Impact: The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip,
nor is it located within an area covered by the County’s Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
The nearest airport facility is the Buchanan Field, approximately 2.3 miles southeast of the
project site. Thus, the proposed project would not expose people to excessive noise levels from
either Buchanan Field or a private airstrip and there is no impact.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Noise Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30921/Ch11-Noise-
Element?bidId=
• Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc, “Windhover Terrace Apartments Noise Assessment.”
Prepared by Michael Thill. Received on May 12, 2022.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The project includes the construction of a three-story
apartment building that proposes 24-units of residential (apartments) living spaces. Based
on the United States Census Burau’s estimate of 2.48 persons per household (between
2017-2021) for Martinez, the project would potentially increase the population by an
estimated 60 people. Since this project would result in a relatively small change in the
population (per the United States Census Bureau date July 1, 2022, Martinez has an
estimated population of 36,447), which means that the project would result in an
approximately 0.16% percent increase in population for the area. This population increase
would not require the extension of roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, the project
would be less than significant.
142
DRAFT
39
b) No Impact: The proposed residential development will be constructed on a vacant lot that
has been previously zoned for multi-family residential development. There is no need to
alter or remove any of the surrounding residential units in order to establish the proposed
development. Thus, the construction and establishment of the proposed 24-unit apartment
complex would not displace any person, nor necessitate the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.
Sources of Information
• United States Census Bureau. “U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Martinez city,
California” accessed in 2022.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: Fire protection and emergency medical response services for the
project vicinity are provided by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. The project
site is located within a 2.3 mile drive from Contra Costa County Fire Station 14, 2.7 mile drive
from Contra Costa County Fire Station 9 and 3.3 mile drive from Contra Costa County Fire
Station 13. The project is required to comply with the applicable provisions of the California
Fire Code, the California Residential Code, and the Contra Costa County Ordinances that
pertain to emergency access, fire suppression systems, and fire detection/warning systems. The
proposed project has been reviewed by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. In a
comment letter dated November 15, 2021, the fire district reviewed the project and did not
indicate that a new fire protection facility would be needed as a result of the project. When it
comes time to submit for building permits for the proposed project, the construction drawings
would have to be reviewed and approved by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
As a result, the project’s potential impacts on fire protection would be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Police protection and patrol services in the unincorporated
Martinez area and the project vicinity are provided by the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s office.
The Public Facilities/Services Element of the County General Plan requires 155 square feet of
station area per 1,000 population in unincorporated Contra Costa County. As discussed earlier
143
DRAFT
40
in this study, the proposed project will create 24 residential (apartment units) which could
potentially increase the population by an estimated 60 people (as discussed in the Population
and Housing Section above.) This minimal population increase would not impact the County’s
ability to maintain a Sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of station area and support
facilities per 1,000 members of the population. Thus, the project would not result in the need
for new or expanded police protection facilities or services in the County.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Martinez
Unified School District and would induce a student increase to their classroom numbers. The
project was referred to the Martinez Unified School District for comments. At the time of the
completion of this study, no indication was received from the school district that expansion of
existing school facilities would be necessary. However, to address student growth in school
districts as a result of residential developments in the County, a per-square-foot school fee
amount is determined by the school district. Prior to issuing building permits, the County
Building Inspection Division collects the school fees on behalf of the respective school district
as part of the overall building permit fees or requires a receipt showing payment of the
applicable fee to the school district. Payment of the development fees pursuant to State
regulations for school services would reduce impacts to neighborhood schools to less than
significant levels.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The policy for Parks and Recreation in the Growth Management
element of the County General Plan indicates that a standard of 3 acres of neighborhood parks
per 1,000 persons should be maintained within the County. As stated previously, the project
would not cause a significant population increase in the Martinez community. The applicant has
proposed to landscape 20% of the project site as an outdoor area for use of future residents.
While the project as proposed will not result in a significant increase in the County population,
all residential projects are required to pay a Park Dedication and Park Impact fees which are
adopted by the County Board of Supervisors to the County, which will be used to acquire park
land and develop parks and recreation facilities to serve new residential development in the
unincorporated County. Therefore, as the applicant has elected to pay an in-lieu fee instead of
constructing new park areas in order to comply with the County Park Dedication Ordinance,
there is no potential for the proposed project resulting in a substantial adverse environmental
impact as a result of the construction of new or expanded parks.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: During staff’s initial review of the proposed development and
prior to deeming the project complete, project-specific comments were solicited from various
local agencies and other interested parties in order to alert County staff and the applicant to any
additional permitting, improvements, etc., that may be required as part of the project. Among
the groups solicited for this project were the Contra Costa County Water District and MT. View
Sanitary District. No indication of a need for new or expanded facilities was provided in the
comments.
The Contra Costa Library operates 28 facilities in Contra Costa County, including the Martine
– Contra Costa County Library, located approximately 2.3 miles west of the project site. The
Contra Costa Library system is primarily funded by local property taxes, with additional
revenue from intergovernmental sources. A portion of the property taxes on the project site
144
DRAFT
41
would go to the Contra Costa Library system. Accordingly, the impact of the use of the public
libraries by people living in the 60 residential (apartment) units would be less than significant.
Contra Costa County Health Services District (CCCHSD) operates a regional medical center
(hospital) and 10 health centers and clinics in the County. CCCHSD is primarily funded by
federal and state funding programs, with additional revenue from local taxes. Since significant
impacts to public facilities, such as hospitals are usually caused by substantial increases in
population, the potential impact of the use of public health facilities by people living in the 60
residential (apartment) units would be less than significant.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Public Facilities/Services Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30917/Ch7-Public-
Facilities_Services-Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Growth Management Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30914/Ch4-Growth-
Management-Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District “File #CDDP21-03031.” Dated
November 15, 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed development will induce a small population
increase in the area, and as a result, it is anticipated that the use of neighborhood and regional
parks in the area will also increase. Pursuant to the Growth Management Element of the County
General Plan, the standard is to have a minimum of 3 acres of neighborhood parks for every
1,000 members of the population. The project includes the construction of a new 24-unit
apartment complex that will increase the population by approximately 60 persons. This
potential increase in population would not be significant enough to warrant the need for a new
park, or substantially accelerate the deterioration of any existing parks or other recreational
facilities. Additionally, the applicant will be required to pay Park dedication in-lieu fees as part
of the project. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially deteriorate existing park
facilities.
145
DRAFT
42
b) Less Than Significant Impact: As previously stated, the potential increase in population would
not be significant enough to warrant the need to construct or expand recreational facilities.
Additionally, the applicant will be required to pay the County mandated park impact fee for
each apartment unit. Park fees are collected to fund the acquisition and development of parks in
Contra Costa County to serve unincorporated County residents.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. “Park Dedication
and Park Impact Fees.” Accessed in 2022.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/42080/Park- Fees-
Overview?bidId=.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
17. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project:
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject property fronts Windhover Way. Windhover Way is
35 feet wide with two 10.5-foot travel lanes and parallel parking permitted on both sides. It has
a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph. Windhover Way intersects with Pacheco Boulevard
approximately 160 feet south of the proposed location for the project driveway. Pacheco
Boulevard is classified as a Route of Significance and is oriented in the east-west direction. It
has one travel lane and a bike lane in each direction together with a two-way left-turn lane. The
posted speed limit is 45 mph. Parking is permitted on both sides where there is sufficient width.
Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the General Plan, and Chapter 82-32
(Transportation Demand Management) require a traffic impact analysis of any project that is
estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. In order to evaluate the project, a
“Transportation Impact Analysis for the Apartments Residential Development Project,” study
was prepared by W-Trans and received by the County on September 7, 2022. The anticipated
trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021 for
“Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)” (ITE LU #220). The site is currently undeveloped and
therefore not generating any trips. For a conservative analysis, trip reductions resulting from
146
DRAFT
43
nearby transportation options were not applied. Further reductions attributable to internal
capture, pass-by or any other trip reductions are not applicable and therefore have also not been
applied. The expected trip generation potential for the proposed project is indicated in Table 1
below. The proposed project is expected to generate an average of 162 trips per day, including
10 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 12 during the p.m. peak hour; these new trips represent
the increase in traffic associated with the project.
Chapter 82-32 of the County Code requires the preparation of a “Transportation Demand
Management” (TDM) program, for all residential projects with 13 or more dwelling units. The
TDM Ordinance Guide encourages the use of creative and effective ways to reduce motor
vehicle trips and their associated impacts created by new development projects. To minimize
parking demand and reduce vehicle trips, the applicant may consider, but should not be limited
to, reducing the number of parking spaces, providing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure,
providing transit passes, unbundling the price of parking from rent, providing emerging
mobility options (e.g., electric scooters, bike share, etc.), and other strategies commonly used to
minimize parking demand and automobile trips. Thus, W-Trans prepared a draft TDM program
dated September 13, 2022 and received by the County on September 22, 2022 for the
Apartment complex which recommends similar TDM measures. The draft TDM program
concluded that the proposed pedestrian bicycle and transit facilities would be adequate to serve
the project as proposed; the number of short and long term bicycle parking spaces proposed
would be greater than the County’s requirement and that the implementation of the TDM
program would reduce vehicle trips. Staff of the County’s Transportation Planning division
further recommends that a final TDM Program and a TDM Coordinator be required as
conditions of approval.
Since the proposed project would generate less than 100 peak hour trips, a traffic impact
analysis is not required in accordance with General Plan Policy 4-c. In addition, as
recommended by County Transportation Planning staff, compliance with the County’s Electric
Vehicle (EV) Ordinance and requiring a final TDM program and a TDM Coordinator as
conditions of approval would ensure that the project results in a less than significant impact on
programs, plans, ordinances or policies regarding transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: CEQA provides guidelines for analyzing transportation impacts
relating to vehicle miles travelled (VMT) resulting from the project. The Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) established recommendations for identifying and mitigating
transportation impacts within CEQA and published a final Technical Advisory in December of
2018 that advises lead agencies to conduct a screening process to “quickly identify when a
project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed
study.” As mentioned above, W-Trans prepared a “Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation”
147
DRAFT
44
on behalf of the project applicant to identify whether the project would be expected to cause a
significant impact and, thus, require a detailed VMT study. W-Trans identified the following
project screening criteria as part of their assessment.
Consideration was given to the project’s potential generation of Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT). As a result of SB 743, the Board of Supervisors adopted a VMT policy on June 23,
2020, in their document Transportation Analysis Guidelines. Guidance provided in this
document recommends the use of screening thresholds to identify when a proposed project is
presumed to result in a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study.
According to the Contra Costa County Travel Demand Model estimates, the Countywide home-
based average VMT per resident is 19.4 miles. Concurring with guidance provided by this
document, a project located anywhere in the County which generates a VMT that is 15-percent
or more below this value, or 16.5 miles per resident, should be expected to cause a less-than-
significant VMT impact and would not require further VMT analysis.
The project would be located within Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 20034 of the Contra Costa
Travel Demand Model which has a home-based VMT of 16.0 miles per resident. Because this
per capita VMT rate of 16.0 is lower than the significance threshold of 16.5 miles, the project is
presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact and does not require further VMT
analysis. Further, adjacent TAZs west of I-680, including 20033 and 20038, also have a per
capita VMT rate that is less than the significance threshold so are consistent with TAZ 20034.
A summary of the VMT findings is provided in Table 4 below.
As shown in the table above, the project will a lower VMT rate than the significance threshold.
Per CEQA section 15064.3(b) – Determining the Significant of Transportation Impacts, a
transportation project that does not exceed the significant threshold is considered to have a less
than significant transportation impact. Therefore is determined to not be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.2(b).
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject property fronts Windhover Way, which is 35 feet
wide with two 10.5-foot travel lanes and parallel parking permitted on both sides. It has a prima
facie speed limit of 25 mph. As shown on Figure 5-2 (Roadway Network Plan) of the General
Plan Transportation and Circulation Element, Windhover Way is not considered to be an
existing or proposed arterial, expressway, or freeway. According to the project plans, the site
will have access from a private driveway located on Windhover Way, approximately 160 feet
north of Pacheco Boulevard. This will be the only access point to and from the proposed
148
DRAFT
45
project. The proposed apartment building will be setback approximately 100 feet from the
roadway entrance, therefore, not creating any site obstructions or hazards in relation to the
Windhover Way circulation. As part of the review process, the County referred the project out
to the Contra Costa County Public Works Department for review. In a Staff Report dated
December 19, 2022, the Public Works Department stated that there is no need to “further
widening or frontage improvements are necessary with this development,” and provided a
standard condition of approval that requires the applicant to adhere to Chapter 82-18,
“Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveway with
Windover Way in accordance with Chapter 82-18 “Sight Obstructions at Intersections” of the
County Ordinance Code. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight
distance at this intersection, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining walls, or
other obstructions proposed at this intersection shall be setback to ensure that the sight line is
clear of any obstructions.” No substantial changes to the existing transportation system are
proposed with this application. Compliance with the Public Works conditions of approval will
result in the project having a less than significant impact on the Windhover Way right-of-way
and is not expected to substantially increase hazards due to geometric design features or
incompatible uses.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project was referred to the Contra Costa County Fire
Protection District for agency comments. In a comment letter dated November 15, 2021, the
Fire Protection District stated that the project shall comply with the applicable California Fire
Code, the California Building Code, the California Residential Code and Local and County
Ordinances and adopted standards. All construction plans will be subject to the applicable Fire
Code that is in effect at the time when the application for a building permit is submitted.
Additionally, the applicant will work with the Fire Protection District to submit construction
plans for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Therefore, the routine review
of construction plans will ensure that the proposed project has no potential for adversely
impacting existing emergency access to the subject property or other properties within the
County.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Growth Management Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30914/Ch4-Growth-
Management-Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 5: Transportation and Circulation
Element.” 2005-2020. http://www.co.contra-
costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/30915/Ch5-Transportation-and-Circulation-
Element?bidId=.
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “0 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez.” Agency
Comment Response Letter. Dated November 15, 2021.
• Contra Costa County Public Works. “Development Permit DP21-3031Staff Report and
Recommended Conditions of Approval’ Dated December 19, 2022.
• W-Trans “Transportation Impact Analysis for the Gulway Apartments Residential
Development Project.” Dated September 6, 2022 and received on September 7, 2022.
149
DRAFT
46
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
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:
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:
a-b) Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation: As discussed in the Cultural Resources section
5of this study, there are no known existing structures located at the project site that are listed on
the Contra Costa County’s Historic Resource Inventory, or the California’s Register of
Historical Resources, or the National Register of Historic places, nor is there any building or
structure that qualifies to be listed. The project site is vacant. In addition, the project was
referred out to the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to which they
responded in a letter dated November 22, 2021, stating that “the proposed project area has a
low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological sites.” Additionally, there is no
evidence in the record at the time of completion of this study that indicates the presence of
human remains at the project site. On May 23 and May 24, 2021, a Notice of Opportunity to
Request Consultation for the proposed Apartment Building was sent to the Wilton Rancheria
and the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation, two California Native American tribes that are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area. No requests for consultation or
responses regarding tribal cultural resources have been received from California Native
American tribes at the time of completion of this study.
Potential Impact: As discussed previously in Section 5, subsurface construction activities have
the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources.
Therefore, the implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural 1 and Mitigation Measure
Geology 6 will ensure that project-related impacts to previously undiscovered and unknown
cultural resources will be less than significant.
Sources of Information
• California Historical Resources Information System. “CDDP21-03031 / APN 380-220-
066 on Pacheco Blvd, Martinez / Calichi Design Group.” Dated November 22, 2021
150
DRAFT
47
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located in a developed, urbanized area of
Unincorporated Martinez, which is served by existing water, sewer, storm drain, electric power,
natural gas and telecommunications services. There is no indication from any utility service
provider that the proposed residential complex would result in a need to relocate, expand, or
construct new facilities in such a way as to cause significant environmental effects.
Water: The new development is located within the service area of the Contra Costa Water
District. Project plans have been sent to the Water District as part of the initial review process.
In a letter dated November 18, 2021, the Water District provided comments stating that the new
development will require a fire service, a domestic service and an irrigation service. The letter
also requested that the applicant work with the Water District engineering services to request
water service for the site. The Contra Costa Water District staff has reviewed the project
application documents regarding the provision of new water service pursuant to their water
service regulations and there has been no indication from the water company that the proposed
project would exceed the capacity of the existing public water infrastructure.
Wastewater treatment: The project is within the MT. View Sanitary District service area, which
is the agency responsible for ensuring that applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board are met and maintained. The wastewater generated by
24 new apartment dwelling units would incrementally increase wastewater flows in the MT.
View Sanitary District system. Project plans have been sent to MT. View Sanitary District as
151
DRAFT
48
part of the initial review process, and there is no indication that the proposed project would
exceed their ability to provide sewer services with the currently available facilities. In a
returned comment letter dated November 17, 2021, MT. View Sanitary District requested that
the applicant submit sewer improvement plans to the District and that a sewer permit
application shall be required to be obtained from the District. Therefore, there is no indication
that the project would require expansion of the wastewater treatment system.
Storm water drainage: As discussed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section above, the
applicant has submitted a preliminary Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) designed with project
storm water controls including permeable AC pavements to be used in the parking stalls,
landscaping and bioretention facilities. The project proposes to capture stormwater runoff from
the site into a bioretention facility onsite which will discharge to an existing 18” storm drain in
Windhover Way. The applicant also is requesting an exception to Division 914 of the County
Ordinance. The storm water and drainage facilities were reviewed by the Contra Costa County
Public Works department and in a Staff Report and Recommended Conditions of Approval
dated December 19, 2022, Public Works stated that they are not averse to granting the
exception. Additionally, they deemed the applicant submitted Preliminary Stormwater Control
Plan dated February 22, preliminary complete. Conditions of approval from Public Works is
required a final Stormwater Control Plan which will be submitted prior to the applicant
obtaining a building permit. The Final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) will be accompanied
by a Stormwater Control operation and Maintenance Plan and will be required to be in
compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and shall be
consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
Based on the incorporation of a SWCP to control the increased runoff, the review by the
County agency responsible for enforcing drainage standards, and upon implementation of the
conditions of approval from the Contra Costa County Public Works Department, the proposed
project would have a less than significant adverse environmental impact on stormwater or
wastewater treatment facilities.
Electric/Natural Gas: The project is within the service territory of PG&E for electric and natural
gas service. It is anticipated that the project will connect to underground electric and/or natural
gas connections. There is no indication that the construction of new or expanded electric or
natural gas services is required for the ongoing operation of the project. Temporary power for
construction activities would also be provided by PG&E. The applicant will be required to
apply for temporary power and follow the permitting process for connecting to the electrical
grid.
Telecommunication Services: Existing telephone, cellular, internet, and cable television are
available within the project site’s vicinity. The project site would connect to these services
provided by several different providers, and there is no indication that the 24 new residential
units would result in the need for expanded services such as new or larger wireless facilities.
By following the processes required to connect to existing water, wastewater treatment, storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the impacts of the
project concerning these utilities and services would be less than significant.
152
DRAFT
49
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is presently served by municipal water supplies
from the Contra Costa Water District. According to County records, the project parcel is not
located in an area with a Groundwater Act. As discussed in subsection-a above, the new
development will be required to work with the Contra Costa Water District. The Water District
staff has reviewed the project application documents regarding the provision of new water
service pursuant to their water service regulations and there has been no indication from the
water company that the existing public water infrastructure would have insufficient water
supplies to serve the project, or that the project would have a significant impact on the public
water infrastructure during dry, and multiple dry years.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed in subsection-a above, the new development is
within the MT. View Sanitary District, which is the agency responsible for ensuring that
applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board are
net and maintained. Project plans were sent to the MT. View Sanitary District as part of the
initial review process, and there has been no indication from them that the proposed project
would exceed their ability to provide sewer services with the currently available facilities. Nor
is there any indication that the project would require expansion of the wastewater treatment
system. In a comment letter dated November 17, 2021, the District is requiring the applicant to
submit sewer improvement plans for review and approval and to submit a sewer permit for the
final District approval. The Sanitary District would connect the dwelling units to its facilities
after processing the residential sewer service application and collecting the applicable
connection fees, completing a building plan review, and issuing a permit for sewer work. By
following this process, the impacts related to the wastewater treatment requirements of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region or the Mt. View
Sanitary facilities would be less than significant.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would generate construction solid waste
and post-construction residential solid waste. Construction on the project site would be subject
to the CalGreen Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Program administered by the
Department of Conservation and Development at the time of application for a building permit.
The Debris Recovery Program requires that at least 65% of construction job site debris (by
weight) for all new residential buildings requiring permits that would otherwise be sent to
landfills be recycled, reused, or otherwise diverted to appropriate recycling facilities. Thus,
although future construction of the apartment buildings would incrementally add to the
construction waste, the impact of the project-related increase would be considered to be less
than significant.
The proposed project would be comprised of residential apartment units, which would generate
the type of solid waste similar to that of other medium density residential uses in the vicinity.
The apartment building will be required to comply with the County Ordinance which requires
solid waste collection for all three waste streams (garbage, recycling and organics.) The project
plans indicate that there will be a proposed trash enclosure located behind the frontage, near the
front of the building. Regular solid wase removal for households in the Martinez area is
provided by Republic Services, which also provides recycling and green waste removal
services. Household waste is ultimately destined for the Keller Canyon Landfill, which has
enough approximate capacity to continue accepting waste for the next 50 years. Household
153
DRAFT
50
waste from the 24-unit apartment project would incrementally add to the household waste
headed to the landfill. However, the potential for the proposed project to exceed the capacity of
the currently utilized landfill is minimal, and the impact of the project-related waste would be
considered to be less than significant.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: As mentioned above, construction at the project site would be
subject to the CalGreen Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Program administered
by the Department of Conservation and Development. The Debris Recovery Program requires
that at least 65% of construction job site debris (by weight) for most construction types, that
would otherwise be sent to landfills, be recycled, reused, or otherwise diverted to appropriate
recycling facilities. The proposed project is not expected to produce significant amounts of
waste that would present a greater conflict with laws and regulations regarding solid waste than
similar multiple and single-family residences in the vicinity. Furthermore, the owner,
construction contractor, and future tenants would be subject to applicable federal, state, and
local laws related to solid waste. Therefore, the potential for conflict with Federal, State, and
local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste is less than
significant.
Sources of Information
• CalGreen / Construction & Demolition Debris Recovery Program
http://www.cccounty.us/4746/CalGreen-Construction-Demolition-Debris-
• Contra Costa County Public Works Department. “Development Permit DP21-03031
Staff Report & Findings and Conditions of Approval.” Dated December 19, 2022.
• Contra Costa Water District. “CCWD Comments on the Windhover Project (County
File Number: CDD21-03031).” Dated November 18, 2021.
• MT. View Sanitary District. “Review of Windhover Way Apartments Application
Package; MVSD Conditions of Approval.” Dated November 17, 2021.
• Republic Services. “Welcome to Republic Services of Unincorporated Contra Costa
County, CA”. website, accessed June 26, 2023.
https://www.republicservices.com/municipality/unincorporated-ccc-ca
154
DRAFT
51
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
20. WILDFIRE – If located in or near the 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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The site is not located in an area of State Responsibility Area
according to the Contra Costa County’s State Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones
on the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire Hazard Severity Map. The
project site is not located near any state responsibility lands classified as a Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone. The nearest State Responsibility Area High or Very High Fire zone is
located more than 2.5 miles to the west. The project is located in a Local Responsibility Area
classified as Urban Unzoned. The project site is in a developed area within the service area of
the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). The project was routed to the
CCFPD, who did not indicate any concerns with an elevated risk of wildfires for the site. The
project will be required to comply with current fire codes, including those pertaining to fire
sprinklers in new buildings, and driveway and roadway access for firefighting apparatus, and
would not require the installation or maintenance of additional infrastructure such as roads or
fuel breaks that may exacerbate fire risk. Additionally, the applicant will be required to submit
construction plans to the fire department for review and approval before any building permits
will be issued to ensure compliance with the applicable fire and building codes. Therefore, the
routine review of construction plans will ensure that final construction plans will not result in a
condition with inadequate emergency vehicle access.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, the risk of exposing
project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire is less than significant. The project is located on a lot with a slight slope, however,
surrounding parcels are relatively flat and within an urbanized area and, thus, would not expose
people or structures to significant risks as a result of post-fire slope instability or runoff.
Development will be subject to review and approval by the Contra Costa County Fire
155
DRAFT
52
Protection District. It is expected that compliance with the California Fire Code, California
Building Code, California Residential Code and Local and County Ordinances, will keep the
project-related risks associated with wildfires at less than significant levels.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The project does not require
any road widening or frontage improvements. The project was reviewed by the CCCFPD and
does not require the installation of emergency roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources that
may exacerbate fire risk. Additionally, Chapter 96-10 of the County Ordinance Code requires
all new utility distribution services to be installed underground, thereby reducing fire risk in the
area. Thus, project-related risks (regarding installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure associated with fire risks) shall have a less than significant impact on the
environment.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The project site contains a
slight slope but does not contain any hills or steep topography. Moreover, the surrounding area
is relatively flat and is not near a major body of water that would be susceptible to flooding.
Therefore, the risk of exposing people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes is
less than significant.
Sources of Information
• California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County Very High
Fire Hazzard Severity Zones in LRA.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “0 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez.” Dated
November 15, 2021.
156
DRAFT
53
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation: Although the development of the proposed
multi-family residential complex would be contained within the 32,820 square foot project site,
due to the undeveloped nature of the project site, it has the potential for impacting the
environment. As stated in this Initial Study, the project is located in an area that is vacant and
surrounding by urbanized uses. There is no evidence in the record that the site or surrounding
area contains substantial habitat for fish or a wildlife species or will reduce a rare or endangered
plant or eliminate an important period in California history. The project was referred to
numerous agencies who provided comments on the project stating that impacts would be
minimal. However, due to the undeveloped nature of the project, there is a potential for
impacting the environment in relation to undiscovered resources. The project would not
substantially degrade the quality of the natural environment because the potentially significant
impacts regarding aesthetics, cultural/tribal resources, air quality, noise, geology/soils as
identified throughout this initial study, can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Where
mitigation measures are enforced as proposed in this Initial Study, the measures will be
conditions of approval of the proposed project and the applicant will be responsible for
implementation of the measures. Therefore, the potential for substantial impacts to the
environment or other resources related to the environment as a result of the proposed project is
reduced to a less than significant level.
b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project site is located within
the Urban Limit Line in an area that has been designated for multiple-family high-density
residential development. The number of housing units in the Martinez area would increase by
157
DRAFT
54
24-units with the proposed project. The project site is the only vacant parcel located on
Windhover Way and is one of a few vacant parcels within a two-mile radius. Staff is aware of
one substantial development project in the immediate vicinity within the Martinez area that is
under review. Staff is unaware of any substantial development projects in the nearby Martinez
area that have recently been approved. The project under review is as follows:
1. (County File #CDDP22-03036) The project includes a Development Plan modification to
allow for a 33-unit multi-family residential project in four buildings on two lots with 78 on-
site parking spaces. The application also includes a Vesting Tentative Map to allow a 33-unit
multi-family residential subdivision. The development would be located on APN 380-220-
044, 3845 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez, CA 94553. The project is currently deemed incomplete
during the 30-day application review.
This area of the County is readily serviced by the public services and utilities such as water,
power, sanitary, and fire protection. The Community Development Division (CDD) generally
solicits project specific comments from these agencies as part of the application review process,
and design modifications are made based on the advice of each respective agency. The
consulted agencies are the governing bodies with proficient knowledge of the needs of their
existing infrastructure, and no indication of potential impacts or the need for new or expanded
services was noted for the project proposal. Therefore, County CDD staff’s consultation with
outside agencies for each project and with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures
for this proposed project reduces the potential for significant cumulative environmental impacts
related to new or expanded utilities to a less than significant level.
The proposed project will have temporary impacts that would occur as a result of construction
activities that would be mitigated at the project level. No long-term adverse impacts are
anticipated to occur, and as such, the incremental effects of the project would not be
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. With the implementation of the
mitigations described in the sections above, the proposed project would not result in
cumulatively considerable impacts on the environment.
c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: This Initial Study has disclosed
potential impacts on human beings that would be less than significant with the implementation
of mitigation measures. All identified mitigation measures will be included as conditions of
approval for the proposed project, and the applicant will be responsible for implementation of
the measures. As a result, there would not be any environmental effects that will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
158
REFERENCES
In the process of preparing the Initial Study Checklist and conduction of the evaluation, the cited
references were consulted. Reference materials are available for review by contacting Everett Louie,
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, by email at
everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us or by phone at (925) 655-2873
1. Project Applicant and Plans for County File #CDDP21-03031
2. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 9: Open Space Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30919/Ch9-Open-Space-
Element?bidId=
3. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 5: Transportation and Circulation Element,”
2005-2020. http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/30915/Ch5-
Transportation-and- Circulation-Element?bidId=
4. California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
5. Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2017.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
6. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. “Spare the Air, Cool the Climate Final, 2017
Clean Air.” Adopted 19 April 2017. http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-
andresearch/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-
pdf.pdf?la=en.
7. Contra Costa County. “Climate Action Plan.” Adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors on 15 December 2015.
http://www.co.contracosta.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/39791/Contra-Costa-County-
Climate-Action-Plan?bidId=.
8. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 8: Conservation Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30918/Ch8-Conservation-
Element?bidId=
9. California Department of Fish and Wildlife Lands. Public Access Lands Map. Accessed May
28,2021. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/lands/
10. Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Division 816 – Trees.
https://library.municode.com/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code?nodeId=TIT8Z
O_DIV816TR
159
11. California Department of Conservation. California Historical Resources. https://ohp.parks
.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=7
12. Contra Costa County Historic Resources Inventory (2019) - https://www.contracosta
.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1116/Historic-Resources-Inventory-HRI?bidId
13. California Historical Resources Information System Letter Dated November 22, 2021.
14. California Air Resources Board, Assembly Bill 32 Overview
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm
15. California Energy Commission 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2022standards/
16. California Division of Mines and Geology - Special Publication 42.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/Special-
Publications/SP_042.pdf
17. California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Map.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/
18. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 10: Safety Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30920/Ch10-Safety-
Element?bidId=
19. United States Geologic Survey. Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014-
2043. August, 2016. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf
20. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil
Survey Map. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
21. Darwin Myers Associates. “Geologic Peer Review – CDDP21-0303,” Dated November 19.
2021.
22. California Department of Public Health FAQs About Asbestos in the Home and Workplace,
2017.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/CDPH%20Document
%20Library/AsbestosFactSheet_201711_final-ADA.pdf
23. California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor. Hazardous Waste and
Substances Site List. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp
160
24. California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment
Program. Contra Costa County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA, 2009.
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf
25. California State Geoportal. “California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer.” Accessed in 202.
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414.
26. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “CCCFPD Project No.:P-2021-05611.” Dated
November 15, 2021.
27. CALICHI DESIGN GROUP. “Stormwater Control Plan for DP21-3031).” Dated February
15, 2022.
28. Contra Costa Clean Water Program, C3 Guidance: Development, https://www.cccleanwater
.org/construction-business/development
29. Contra Costa County Public Works CDP21-03031 Staff Report & Recommended Conditions
of Approval dated December 19, 2022.
30. Contra Costa County Tsunami Hazard Areas, California Department of Conservation, 2021.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/contra-costa
31. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Land Use Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
32. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Noise Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30921/Ch11-Noise-Element?bidId=
33. Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc, “Windhover Terrace Apartments Noise Assessment.” Prepared by
Michael Thill. Received on May 12, 2022.
34. United States Census Bureau. “U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Martinez city, California”
accessed in 2022.
35. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Public Facilities/Services Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30917/Ch7-Public-
Facilities_Services-Element?bidId=
36. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Growth Management Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30914/Ch4-Growth-Management-
Element?bidId=
37. Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. “Park Dedication and
Park Impact Fees.” Accessed in 2022.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/42080/Park- Fees-Overview?bidId=.
161
38. W-Trans “Transportation Impact Analysis for the Gulway Apartments Residential
Development Project.” Dated September 6, 2022 and received on September 7, 2022.
39. CalGreen / Construction & Demolition Debris Recovery Program http://www.cccounty.us
/4746/CalGreen-Construction-Demolition-Debris-
40. Contra Costa Water District. “CCWD Comments on the Windhover Project (County File
Number: CDD21-03031).” Dated November 18, 2021.
41. MT. View Sanitary District. “Review of Windhover Way Apartments Application Package;
MVSD Conditions of Approval.” Dated November 17, 2021.
42. Republic Services. “Welcome to Republic Services of Unincorporated Contra Costa County,
CA”. website, accessed June 26, 2023.
https://www.republicservices.com/municipality/unincorporated-ccc-ca
43. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County Very High Fire
Hazzard Severity Zones in LRA.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
162
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
County File #CDDP21-03031
24-Unit Windhover Terrace Apartments
North of Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd Intersection
Martinez, CA 94553
July 11, 2023
163
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 2 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
SECTION 1: AESTHETICS
Potentially Significant Impacts: Project lighting could spill off-site and result in a potentially
significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring
properties. (Introduction of new light sources).
Mitigation Measures(s):
Aesthetics 1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the (CDD) for
review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the proposed light
post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed down and
screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent glare or
excessive light spillover.
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents; during
grading/construction activities
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff
Compliance Verification: Review of construction drawings
SECTION 3: AIR QUALITY
Potentially Significant Impacts: Future grading and construction activities on the project site
would result in localized emissions of dust, diesel exhaust, and combustion emissions that could
result in potential, if temporary, air quality impacts to sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences,
schools) from the project site during project construction.
Mitigation Measure(s):
Air Quality 1: The following mitigations shall be included on all construction plans and
implemented throughout the construction phase of the project:
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 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.
164
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 3 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
5. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
6. 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.
8. 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 shall be provided for construction workers at all
access points.
9. 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.
10. The property owner or site contractor shall 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.
11. Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a
6- to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
12. All contractors shall use equipment that meets the California Air Resources Board’s
(CARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.
.
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents, and
throughout construction-related activity.
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff.
Compliance Verification: Review of Construction Drawings. Photographic evidence
of posted sign. Onsite inspection and monitoring of
construction vehicles, equipment, and project site.
SECTION 5: CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially Significant Impacts: Although there is no evidence that there is any specific cultural
resources known in in the project area, there is nevertheless a potential for previously unknown
165
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 4 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
cultural resources to be uncovered during construction activities requiring excavation or earth
movement.
Mitigation Measure(s):
CULTURAL-1: The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground
disturbance and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed below are
included on the construction plans. If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the
discovery shall be redirected. A qualified archaeologist certified by the Society for California
Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA), and the Native
American Tribe that has requested consultation and/or demonstrated interest in the project
shall be contacted to evaluate the significance of the finds and suggest appropriate
mitigation(s) if deemed necessary.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading, or
trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if they observe
any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural resource discovery (e.g.,
wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies;
deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of
the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the
finds and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the
County and other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be mitigated.
Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be prepared
documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report should be submitted
to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of a
Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage
Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the property and
provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave
goods.
166
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 5 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist should prepare
a report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for the
treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and
in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report should be submitted
to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Upon discovery of archaeological materials or human
remains
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff, consulting Archaeologist
Compliance Verification: Review of archaeologist’s report or other verification
provided to CDD staff
SECTION 7: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Potentially Significant Impacts: The consulting geotechnical engineer indicates
potentially expansive and corrosive soils existing on the subject property which can be
detrimental to concrete and buried metal such as those used for utilities or reinforcing
steel. In addition, conditions in the field may vary from those expected based on field
investigation, laboratory tests, and engineering analysis performed by the consulting
engineer. Thus, it is critically important that adequate geotechnical review be provided.
Additionally, ground disturbance during the project’s construction phase has the potential
for disturbing previously unknown unique paleontological resources. In addition to the
mitigation measures for Cultural Resources, the following mitigation measures will ensure
that in the event unique paleontological resources are discovered, the proper actions are
taken to reduce the adverse environmental impacts to unique paleontological resources to
a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure(s):
GEOLOGY-1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or
grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall submit
a geotechnical report update with the geotechnical review fee in the amount of $3,000,
referencing the proposed grading, drainage and foundation plans and providing specific
criteria and standards for site grading, drainage and foundation design based on adequate
subsurface data, laboratory testing of samples and engineering analysis. The scope of the
geotechnical investigation shall address the following potential hazards: (i) expansive soils,
(ii) corrosive soils, (iii) siting and design of any required bio-retention facilities and/or other
measures that may be recommended to achieve compliance with the clean water requirements
of the RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing undocumented fills and effective measures
167
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 6 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
to control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v) provide seismic parameters based on the
adopted California Building Code at the time that a residential building permit is requested.
GEOLOGY 2: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or
grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the geotechnical report update
required by Geology 1, above, shall be subject to review by the County’s peer review
geologist, and review/approval of the CDD. Improvement, grading and building plans shall
carry out the recommendations of the approved report.
GEOLOGY 3: Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of foundation-related
work) the project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential testing of the
graded building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid damage to
improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel).
GEOLOGY 4: The geotechnical report required by Geology 1 routinely includes
recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. These
services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer to
(i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed conditions
during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the basis of the
design recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the opportunity for field
modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID approval), based on exposed
conditions. The monitoring shall commence during clearing, and extend through grading,
including testing services during placement of engineered fill, installation of recommended
drainage facilities, and foundation related work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final”
grading inspection, pending submittal of a report from the project geotechnical engineer that
documents their observation and testing services during grading, installation of drainage
improvements.
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the apartment
building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer documenting the
monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-related geotechnical
recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier hole drilling/ foundation
preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g. collection of roof gutter runoff
in a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable discharge point; and possibly installation of
a subdrain system around the perimeter of the foundation to control moisture beneath the
foundation).
GEOLOGY 5: All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during the dry season
(April 15 through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be revegetated to
minimize erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion control work
shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved by the
Building Inspection Division.
168
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 7 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
GEOLOGY 6: Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during grading,
trenching, or other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials shall
be stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and,
if deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s).
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents
(GEOLOGY 1 , 2, 4); throughout construction-related
activity, and prior to final inspections (GEOLOGY 3). In
the event of paleontological materials being discovered
(GEOLOGY 6)
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff, Consulting Geotechnical
Engineer, County Geologist
Compliance Verification: Review of Geotechnical Engineer’s report; review of
construction drawings; or other verification provided to
CDD staff
SECTION 13: NOISE
Potentially Significant Impacts: As shown on Figure 11-5 O of the Noise Element, the subject
property is within an area of the County that is identified as having nose levels range above 60
decibels. The introduction of a new residential apartment building could introduce new noise
sources including temporary noise from construction activities. There may be periods of time
where there would be loud noise generated from the construction equipment, vehicles, and tools
that would impact nearby residences and businesses. Additionally, outdoor-to-indoor noise may
also be present due to the location of the project in close proximity to residences and Pacheco
boulevard.
Mitigation Measure(s):
NOISE-1: All windows and doors shall have the minimum ratings STC 26 and mechanical
ventilation installed for the building.
NOISE 2: The following construction restrictions shall be implemented during project
construction and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant
shall provide evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are included on the
face of the construction plans.
169
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 8 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
1. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to
adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all project-
related contractors. The applicant shall notify neighbors within 300 feet of the subject
property at least one week in advance of demolition, grading, and construction activities.
2. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random debris
and trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner. The project site must maintain and
keep dust down by watering the site by use of a water truck, water hose, street sweeping
and other dust control and maintenance measures.
3. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number and
person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall respond
and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number to call in complaints
shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
4. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal
combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate stationary
noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences
as possible.
5. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion
engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
6. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other
stationary noise sources where technology exists.
7. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall be
located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-
sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
8. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are imposed
on construction activities, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. This
condition applies to all heavy construction equipment that vibrates.
9. 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)
170
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 9 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents and
throughout construction-related activity and prior to final
inspections; upon receipt of noise complaint(s)
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff
Compliance Verification: Review of Construction Drawings; submittal of pre-
construction meeting date to CDD staff; submittal of a
copy of notice and distribution list to the CDD; field
investigation (in the event of a noise complaint).
SECTION 18: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially Significant Impacts: There is always a potential to damage or destroy previously
undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources during construction related activities. Subsurface
construction activities have the potential to damage or destroy undiscovered historic and
prehistoric resources.
Mitigation Measure(s):
171
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 10 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
CULTURAL 1: The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground
disturbance and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed below are
included on the construction plans. If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the
discovery shall be redirected. A qualified archaeologist certified by the Society for California
Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA), and the Native
American Tribe that has requested consultation and/or demonstrated interest in the project
shall be contacted to evaluate the significance of the finds and suggest appropriate
mitigation(s) if deemed necessary.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading, or
trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if they observe
any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural resource discovery (e.g.,
wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies;
deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of
the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the
finds and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the
County and other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be mitigated.
Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be prepared
documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report should be submitted
to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa County agencies.
If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of a
Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage
Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the property and
provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave
goods. Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist should
prepare a report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for
the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate
and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report should be
submitted to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
172
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 11 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
GEOLOGY 6: Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during grading,
trenching, or other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials shall
be stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and,
if deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s).
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Upon discovery of archaeological materials, human
remains or undiscovered historic and prehistoric
resources.
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff, consulting Archaeologist.
Compliance Verification: Submittal of archaeologist’s report to CDD.
173
CDDP21-03031
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 Photo
City Limits
Streets
Building Outlines
Assessment Parcels
World Imagery
Low Resolution 15m Imagery
High Resolution 60cm Imagery
High Resolution 30cm Imagery
Citations
174
CDDP21-03031
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.
General Plan: Multi-Family Residential, High-Density (MH)
City Limits
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)
WA (Water)
WS (Watershed)
Streets 175
DP21-3031DP16-3009
TR7246
DP88-3044
DP89-3036
2041-RZ
MS88-0115
176
CDDP21-03031
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.
Zoning: Multi-Family Residential (M-29)
City Limits
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)
A-3, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation)
A-3 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District)
A-3, -FH -SG (Flood Hazard and Solar Energy Generation)177
Department of Conservation and Development
County Planning Commission
Wednesday, August 9, 2023 – 6:30 P.M.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____
Project Title:
Development Plan for Windhover Terrace Apartments
County File Number:
CDDP21-03031
Appellant:
Applicant:
Joe Hise, et al.
West Coast Land and Development, Inc. – Pamela West
Owner:
West Coast Land and Development, Inc.
Zoning/General Plan:
Multiple-Family Residential (M-29) / Multiple-Family Residential –
High Density (MH)
Site Address/Location: North of Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd. Intersection, Martinez
CA 94553 (APN: 380-220-066)
California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Status:
The Initial Study (SCH No. 2023070169) identified potentially
significant impacts in the areas of aesthetics, air quality, cultural
resources, geology/soils, noise and tribal cultural resources, and
identified mitigation measures to reduce such impacts to less-than
significant levels.
Project Planner: Everett Louie, Planner II – Phone: (925) 655-2873
Email: everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us
Staff Recommendation: Approve (See section II for full recommendation)
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
This is a hearing on an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve a
Development Plan for the Windhover Terrace Apartments Project, a 24-unit rental
development in unincorporated Martinez. The project includes construction of a 24-unit
apartment building with a building footprint of approximately 22,247 square feet,
construction of a covered carport for 16 parking spaces, and installation of associated
improvements (e.g. pavement, utilities, stormwater conveyance) on a vacant property. The
178
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 2 of 20
project includes a Tree Permit for the removal of four code-protected trees and work within
the dripline of three code-protected trees. The project includes a variance request for a
proposed building height of 38’-6” (where 30’ is the maximum allowed) and a driveway aisle
width of 24.5’ (where 25’ is the minimum required). The project includes two units that will
be made available for rent to low-income households and one unit that will be made
available for rent to very low-income households. The project includes a Density Bonus of
two units for a total of 24 units. The applicant has requested a concession to reduce the
Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%, and requested a reduction in development
standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking ratios and 65915(e) for
reduced parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces.
The project includes approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803 cubic yards of fill. The
applicant requests an exception to Division 914 Collect and Convey requirements.
II. RECOMMENDATION
A. OPEN the public hearing, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing.
B. DENY the appeal by Joe Hise, et al.
C. FIND that the mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project adequately
analyzes the project’s environmental impacts, that there is no substantial evidence that
the project will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the mitigated
negative declaration reflects the County’s independent judgement and analysis.
D. ADOPT the mitigated negative declaration (State Clearing House No. 2023070169)
prepared for the project.
E. ADOPT the mitigation monitoring program for the project.
F. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to file a CEQA Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk.
G. SPECIFY that the Department of Conservation and Development, located at 30 Muir
Road, Martinez, California, is the custodian of the document and other material that
constitutes the record of proceedings upon which the decision of the Board of
Supervisors is based.
H. APPROVE a variance to allow a building height of 38’-6” (where 30’ is the maximum
allowed) and a driveway aisle width of 24.5’ (where 25’ is minimum required).
179
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 3 of 20
I. APPROVE a density bonus to allow two additional units (for a total of 24 units), the
requested concession to reduce the open space requirement, and the requested
reduction in development standards related to parking stall size, parking setbacks, and
number of covered parking spaces.
J. APPROVE the Development Plan for the project, including the associated tree permit
and requested exception from Title 9 offsite collect and convey requirements
(CDDP21-03031).
K. APPROVE the findings in support of the project.
L. APPROVE the project conditions of approval.
M. APPROVE the Windhover Terrace Apartments Project.
III. BACKGROUND
An application for the approval of a Development Plan, Variance and Tree Permit, which
includes a request for a density bonus, concessions and reduction to development
standards, for the construction of a new 24-unit apartment complex was submitted to the
Department of Conservation and Development on October 12, 2021. The matter was initially
heard by the County Zoning Administrator on January 23, 2023, during which the County
Zoning Administrator accepted testimony and continued the Public Hearing to February 22,
2023, as an open public hearing. At the February 22, 2023, Public Hearing, testimony was
accepted from the applicant and members of the public. After receiving testimony and
considering the project analysis provided by County staff, the County Zoning Administrator
approved the Development Plan with modifications and added conditions of approval.
Staff received one letter appealing the Zoning Administrator’s decision from Joe Hise on
February 27, 2023, which included a list of neighbors who signed the appeal letter. Staff’s
analysis and response to the appeal letter is discussed in Section VII (Appeal of Zoning
Administrator’s February 22, 2023 decision) of this Staff report.
Since the Zoning Administrator’s decision, staff determined that it was appropriate to
conduct additional environmental review of the project under the California Environmental
Quality Act. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15071 and Section 15072, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study (MND) was prepared and published for the
project. The 20-day public review period for the MND started on July 11, 2023, and ended
on July 31, 2023. Seven public comments were received from Steve Schmedinghoff, Jesse
Ma, Gayle Ansell, Kevin Mulcahy, Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy, Contra Costa Water District
and the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District during the public review period for the
MND. Staff’s analysis and response to the comments received during the public review
180
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 4 of 20
period of the MND is discussed in Section VI (CEQA Public Comments).
IV. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION
Site Description: The subject lot is approximately 0.77-acres in size (approximately 32,820
square feet) and is a rectangular shaped parcel that includes a 52’ x 70’ strip extending to
the west connecting the parcel to Windhover Way. The parcel is located on the east side of
Windhover Way, approximately 125 feet north of the Pacheco Boulevard and Windhover
Way intersection in the in the Pacheco/Vine Hill area. The parcel is vacant and is largely
covered with grass and dirt and has eight trees located around the perimeter of the parcel.
There is existing curb, sidewalk, streetlights, and underground utilities along the frontage of
Windhover Way. Public Works has reviewed the submittal and has indicated that the
applicant will not be required to perform further widening or frontage improvements. The
general topographic slope of the parcel trends downward from west to east. The elevation
starts at 40 feet above mean sea level at Windhover Way and slopes down to 31 feet above
mean sea level at the rear of the property. The site currently has access off of Windhover
Way which will continue to remain as the access point. The site contains seven trees
consisting of London Plane, Carolina Cherry Laurel, California Black Walnut, Glossy Privet
and Olive tree. There are two off-site trees located in close proximity to the project parcel
that will not be removed by the project including a Siberian elm at the project frontage and
a Coast Redwood towards the southeast corner.
Surrounding Land Uses: This area along Windhover Way is exclusively occupied by
residential development. The adjacent parcels to the north and south host single family
residences. To the east of the site is a 13-unit townhouse development. The two properties
to the west both host duplexes. Approximately 316 feet northeast of the subject property is
a 12-unit apartment complex. Beyond the immediate neighborhood, along Pacheco
Boulevard there are a variety of residential, commercial, and retail uses including multi-
family housing, restaurants, schools, storage locations, gas stations, auto repair shops, and
other retail services. Parcels within the City of Martinez jurisdiction are located approximately
1,100 feet to the east of the subject parcel.
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests approval of a Development Plan to construct a three-story, 38’-6”
tall, 24-unit apartment building. The unit breakdown for the apartment building is provided
on the table below. The table includes the floor, type of apartment, total number of units
and average unit size.
181
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 5 of 20
Proposed Dwelling Unit Summary
Floor Type of Apartment Number of Units Average Unit Size
(gross rentable
square feet)
Building 1st
Floor
Two-bedroom unit
One-bedroom unit
4
4
830
650
Building 2nd
Floor
Two-bedroom unit
One-bedroom unit
4
4
830
650
Building 3rd
Floor
Two-bedroom unit
One-bedroom unit
4
4
830
650
Total 24
Building Design and Height
The three-story apartment building will have a modern design with a flat roof with stucco
siding in a sandstone color blended in with hard shingle siding in a pearl gray color around
the proposed balconies. Window trim will be vinyl style in a sand color. Each level has similar
floor plan layouts, with the two-bedroom units located on the outer portions of the building
and the one-bedroom units located within the interior of the floor. The building would be
comprised of three segments separated by staircase breezeways, joined under one unified
flat roof to minimize the overall bulk of the structure. Building design incorporates a
rectangular shape to create one cohesive building from top to bottom while the open
breezeway at each level adds depth and variation to the exterior of the building. The overall
height of the building will be 38’-6” from natural grade and will appear to be 34’ from
finished grade.
The project also includes various other improvements including:
• Parking-related improvements for 34 parking spaces with two ADA accessible spaces
and four electric vehicle charging spaces.
• Asphalt and permeable pavement are located around the building footprint.
• Landscaping would include 25 trees and numerous shrubs throughout the property
for a total of 6,600 square feet of landscaping. A new six-foot fence along the rear
property line and a six-foot decorative wall along the side property lines.
• Retaining walls along the rear of the property
• Fire Hydrant
• Six long-term bicycle storage lockers and two short-term bicycle storage spaces.
• A 13’-7” tall carport that will cover 16 spaces located on the east side of the parcel.
• An 8’-8”, approx. 261 square foot, trash enclosure structure.
182
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 6 of 20
• Four downward-oriented LED streetlight-style lights to be located near the carport
to provide site security.
• Bioretention Facilities.
• Site preparation would include approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803
cubic yards of fill for bioretention treatment facilities and to direct stormwater to off-
site drainage infrastructure.
• Curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements, and driveway ramp would be constructed
along the project frontage on Windhover Way.
Parking
In accordance with California Density Bonus Law, instead of utilizing the parking
requirements of the County Zoning Code, the applicant is providing parking in accordance
with Government Code Section 65915(p)(1), which states that qualifying housing
developments may provide parking according to the following ratios:
1 Bedroom Units: 1 on-site parking space
2 Bedroom Units: 1.5 on-site parking space
According to these ratios, the project is required by state law to provide 30 on-site parking
spaces. Here, the project will provide a total of 34 on-site parking spaces. The spaces will
include 24 spaces of 9’ x 17’ dimension, six spaces of 9’ x 18’ dimension, and four spaces
of 7.5’ x 14.5’ dimension. These will include compact, accessible, and electric vehicle
parking. The project proposes 17 parking spaces (16 of which will be covered parking
spaces) along the eastern property line, 13 parking spaces along the northern property
line, and four compact parking spaces along the entrance. In addition, six long-term
bicycle parking spaces and two short-term bicycle parking spaces will be provided.
Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
In accordance with California Density Bonus Law, pursuant to Government Code Section
65915(b), the applicant seeks a density bonus for the project. The project would provide 3
affordable units in the housing development—one made available for rent to very-low-
income households and two units made available for rent to low-income households. Under
state law, the project is eligible for a density bonus. The project has a maximum current
density of 22 units under the General Plan Land Use Designation (Multiple-Family Residential
High Density (MH). By providing three low-income units (13%), the project is eligible for a
24.5% density bonus (or six additional units). The applicant has requested a density bonus
to allow two additional units, for a total of 24 units.
Under State Density Bonus Law, the project is also eligible for one development incentive or
concession. County Code Section 84-26.14 requires 25 percent of the area to be landscaped
183
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 7 of 20
and not covered by building, structures, or pavement. The applicant has requested a
concession to reduce the open space requirement from 25% to 20.5% open space area
within the parcel.
Under State Density Bonus Law, the project may also request the waiver or reduction of
development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the development
and the increased density. The applicant has requested waivers or reductions of
development standards to allow a reduced 2’ side yard setback (where 20’ minimum is
required) for parking spaces, a reduced 17.5’ front yard setback (where 25’ minimum is
required) for parking spaces, a reduced parking stall size to allow 9’ x 18 and 9’ x 17 parking
stalls, (where 9’ x 19’ is required), and 16 covered parking where one-half of the required
spaces shall be covered.) The covered parking area is located along the eastern property line
of the site.
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Under the County’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the inclusionary housing requirement
is 3.3 units (calculated as 15% of 22 units). In addition to the 3 affordable units described
above, the applicant has agreed to pay an in-lieu fee of $48,401.10 for the remaining
fractional (0.3) inclusionary unit required.
Circulation and Access
Primary vehicle access to the project site would be from Windhover Way via a driveway that
intersects parallel with Windhover Way and the subject parcel. Windhover Way connects to
Pacheco Boulevard. Both of these roads are County maintained roads. Windhover Way along
the project frontage is approximately 36-foot-wide street within a 56-foot right-of-way. The
driveway isle exiting Windhover Way and leading to the parking lot on site will be 26’ wide
and will lead into an emergency vehicle hammerhead turnaround. Within the parking lot,
the project site will maintain a 25’ parking isle width for the parking spaces along Windhover
Way and a 24.5’ parking aisle width for the parking spaces on the east (side) property line.
The project proposes to install retaining curbs along the edge of the driveway/parking lot
area.
VI. CEQA PUBLIC COMMENTS
An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed project were
posted for public review between July 11, 2023, and July 31, 2023. Seven comment letters
were received during that time from Steve Schmedinghoff, Jesse Ma, Gayle Ansell, Kevin
Mulcahy, Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy, Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) and the Contra
Costa County Fire Protection District. Below is a summary of the comments that address
environmentally related issues discussed in the MND, and staff’s responses to those
184
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 8 of 20
comments.
A. Email from Steve Schmedinghoff received on July 17, 2023.
1. Comment: Steve Schmedinghoff’s correspondence lists concerns regarding traffic,
parking, property values, privacy and emergency vehicle access.
Staff Response: The comments received from Steve Schmedinghoff did not specifically
challenge the adequacy of the environmental document. The concerns pertain more to
the merits of the project and do not specify inadequacies or otherwise challenge the
environmental review. In addition, mitigations and conditions of approval have been
included in the MND and the findings and conditions of approval to address the project’s
potentially significant impacts on the surrounding community. Many of the issues raised
in Steve Schmedinghoff’s letter are addressed in this Staff Report and in the Initial Study,
including parking availability, traffic and property value.
Section 17 - Transportation of the Initial Study concluded that the project will not have
a significant impact on transportation within the project vicinity as the proposed project
would have a less than significant impact in relation to vehicle miles traveled. As stated
in this Staff Report, the project is subject to parking ratios pursuant to 65915(p) which
requires the project to provide 30 parking spaces. The project will provide 34 parking
spaces which exceeds the requirement. The project applicant provided a Traffic Report
which indicated that the project would have a less than significant impact on current
traffic patterns.
Section 17 - Transportation subsection (d) of the Initial Study reviewed the project in
relation to emergency access. The project is required to comply with the applicable
California Fire Code, the California Building Code, the California Residential Code and
Local and County Ordinances and adopted standards. All construction plans will be
subject to the applicable Fire Code that is in effect at the time when the application for
a building permit is submitted. Additionally, the applicant will work with the Fire
Protection District to submit construction plans for review and approval prior to building
permit issuance. Therefore, the routine review of construction plans will ensure that the
proposed project has no potential for adversely impacting existing emergency access to
the subject property or other properties within the County.
B. Email from Jesse Ma received on July 24, 2023.
2. Comment: Jesse Ma’s correspondence lists concerns regarding building height for
emergency services, site drainage and parking and site accessibility.
185
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 9 of 20
Staff Response: The comments received by Jesse Ma did not specifically challenge the
adequacy of the environmental document. Jesse Ma’s correspondence lists concerns that
pertain more to the merits of the project and do not specify inadequacies or otherwise
challenge the environmental review. As stated in the Staff Report, the project is
requesting a Variance for a three-story building with increased height. Staff has made
the findings that support the Variance which are included in the Findings and Conditions
of approval attached to this Staff Report.
As stated in the Staff Report, the new building will be required to comply with all Contra
Costa County Fire Protection standards and codes and will be required to obtain
approval from the Fire District during the building permit process. This will ensure that
the proposed development will meet all fire code requirements.
While Jesse Ma did not specifically challenge the environmental document, the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Section 10 – Hydrology and Water Quality
addresses storm water drainage for the project. The proposed project is designed to
meet Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code which requires all storm water entering
and or/originating on this property to be collected and conveyed to an adequate natural
watercourse or an existing adequate public storm drainage system. The project was
reviewed by the County Public Works Department and was determined to be in
compliant with County Ordinance Code and with the proposed bioretention facility and
will not drain onto surrounding parcels.
Lastly, the project proposes four electric vehicle spaces and two ADA stalls with access
routes to the proposed building. Per the County Code, 10% of the proposed spaces are
required to be electric, therefore a minimum of three spaces are to be required. The
applicant is proposing four and thus, exceeds the minimum requirement.
C. Email from Michael Cameron of Contra Costa County Fire Protection District on July 19,
2023.
3. Comment: Based on the plans, it appears that the project does not provide aerial fire
apparatus access for a building that is over 30 feet tall.
Staff Response: The comments received from the Fire Protection District did not
specifically challenge the adequacy of the environmental document. The project is
required to obtain Fire District approval and to submit construction plans to the Fire
District for review and approval. During this process, the Fire District will work with the
applicant to ensure that the project meets all requirements that the Fire District will
impose on the project including ensuring that the project provides aerial fire apparatus
access. Therefore, by working directly with the Fire District, the project will address this
186
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 10 of 20
concern.
D. Letter from the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) dated July 19, 2023.
4. Comment: The District has reviewed the request and has the following comments: 1.
The premise will require its own service connection, meter, fire service, and reduced
pressure (RP) backflow prevention device. 2. RP backflow prevention devices are above
ground devices, which, in some cases could reduce water pressure to below standard.
Proper planning is necessary to ensure backflow prevention devices are located outside
the footprint of the building either in the “right of way” or in an easement provided by
applicant. A minimum of three-foot clearance is required around all above ground
devices with no vertical impediment. Similarly, fire service will also need to be placed
above ground and meet this clearance minimum. Previous plans from 2021 showed fire
service placed in a vault located below grade.
Staff Response: The comments received from the Water District did not specifically
challenge the adequacy of the environmental document. Rather, the comments are
requesting that the applicant contact and work directly with the Water District to obtain
all the necessary permits before obtaining water service. During this time, the Water
District will ensure that the project will meet the requirements to obtain water service.
The Findings and Conditions of approval of this project include advisory notes that
recommend the applicant contact the Water District prior to continuing with the project.
E. Email from Gayle Ansell received on July 26, 2023.
5. Comment: Gayle Ansell’s correspondence lists concerns regarding a three-story building.
Staff Response: The comments received by Gayle Ansell did not specifically challenge
the adequacy of the environmental document. The concerns pertain more to the merits
of the project and do not specify inadequacies or otherwise challenge the environmental
review. The project is requesting a Variance for a three-story building with increased
height. Staff has made the findings that support the Variance which are included in the
Findings and Conditions of Approval attached to this Staff Report.
F. Email from Kevin Mulcahy received on July 26, 2023 and July 31, 2023.
6. Comment: Kevin Mulcahy’s correspondence lists concerns regarding the density of the
units, parking, traffic, height, and the use of concessions/incentives and reductions.
Staff Response: The comments received by Kevin Mulcahy did not specifically challenge
the adequacy of the environmental document. The concerns pertain more to the merits
187
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 11 of 20
of the project and do not specify inadequacies or otherwise challenge the environmental
review. The project is within the Multiple-Family Residential High Density (MH) Land Use
Designation. This General Plan allows for 22.0 to 29.9 multiple-family units per net acre.
Based on the site’s acreage of 0.6 net acres, the maximum allowed unit on site is 22 units.
However, the Applicant also requested a Density Bonus Request pursuant to
Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A). By providing three inclusionary housing, the project
would be eligible for the State density bonus of 13.6%, and the total allowable unit
county under the MH designation would increase from 22 units to 24 units. Therefore,
the project is within the allowed density for the site.
In the Initial Study Section 17 -, Transportation, the project was found to have a less than
significant impact in regard to traffic. A traffic study was performed and found that the
project will have a lower VMT rate than the significance threshold and therefore, would
have a less than significant impact on traffic related impacts.
The project requests a reduction in development standards pursuant to Government
Code 65915(p) for parking ratios. Under these ratios, the project is required to provide
30 parking spaces. The project is providing 34 parking spaces which exceeds the
requirement and is requesting a reduction in parking stall sizes pursuant to Government
Code 65915(e) which allows an applicant to request reduction in development standards.
Lastly, an Initial Study was prepared and evaluated the project under the California
Environmental Quality Act. The Initial Study found that the project does not have
significant adverse impacts, and therefore, the project is allowed to request
concessions/incentives and reductions in development standards.
F. Email from Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy received on July 26, 2023.
7. Comment: Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy’s correspondence lists concerns regarding
parking, parking stall size, building height, density, traffic and trucked in soil.
Staff Response: The comments received by Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy did not
specifically challenge the adequacy of the environmental document. The concerns
pertain more to the merits of the project and do not specify inadequacies or otherwise
challenge the environmental review. The project requests a reduction in development
standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking ratios. Under these ratios,
the project is required to provide 30 parking spaces. The project is providing 34 parking
spaces which exceeds the requirement. In regard to parking stall size, pursuant to
Government Code 65915(e), an applicant is allowed to request reductions in
development standards. As stated in this Staff Report, the applicant has requested a
reduction in parking stall sizes and will be providing twenty-four 9’ x 17’ dimension
parking spaces and six 9’ x 18’ dimension parking spaces. Chapter 82-16 – Off-Street
188
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 12 of 20
Parking of the County Ordinance requires an 8’-6” space width and 18’ space depth for
each space for parking spaces of ninety degrees. The project does provide multiple
spaces that meet the dimension requirements. Staff researched numerous pick-up truck
brands including the following: Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, GMC, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu,
Jeep, Mazda, Mercedes, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Renault, Rivian, Toyota and Volkswagen and
found that the average dimension of a pick-up truck is 17.7 feet long and 6.3 feet wide.
Therefore, the average pick-up truck would be able to fit within many of the proposed
parking space dimensions on the site. Additionally, the Off-Street Parking ordinance of
the County Code does not require dedication of spaces specifically for pick-up trucks.
The project is requesting a Variance for a three-story building with increased height.
Staff has made the findings that support the Variance which are included in the Findings
and Conditions of approval attached to this Staff Report.
The project is within the Multiple-Family Residential High Density (MH) Land Use
Designation. This General Plan allows for 22.0 to 29.9 multiple-family units per net acre.
Based on the site’s acreage of 0.6 net acres, the maximum allowed units on site is 22
units. However, the Applicant also requested a Density Bonus Request pursuant to
Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A). By providing three inclusionary housing, the project
would be eligible for the State density bonus of 13.6 percent, and the total allowable
unit county under the MH designation would increase from 22 units to 24 units.
Therefore, the project is within the allowed density for the site. In the Initial Study Section
17 -, Transportation, the project was found to have a less than significant impact in
regard to traffic. A traffic study was performed and found that the project will have a
lower VMT rate than the significance threshold and therefore, would have a less than
significant impact on traffic related impacts.
Section 7 - Geology and Soils of the Initial Study reviewed the presence of
undocumented fill on the site. The initial study includes two mitigation measures based
on the County Geologist’s comment to address all undocumented fill and to remedy the
decision. These mitigation measures address the project’s potentially significant impacts
on undocumented fill which are included as conditions of approval.
VII. APPEAL OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S FEBRUARY 22, 2023 DECISION
During the appeal period following approval by the Zoning Administrator, one appeal was
received from Joe Hise. In the correspondence received on February 27, 2023, Joe Hise filed
an appeal on behalf of the signed neighbors included on the letter, appealing the Zoning
Administrator’s decision. The concerns raised in the letter of appeal, and staff’s responses,
are summarized as follows:
189
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 13 of 20
1. Summary of Appeal Point #1: The appellant expressed concerns that the proposed
project does not meet the Multiple Family Residential District (M-29), more
specifically County Code Section 84-26.802 – which provides a maximum height of
buildings or structures within the M-29 Zoning District.
Staff Response: County Code Section 84-26.802 requires all buildings or structures
to have a maximum height of thirty feet in height or twenty feet in height when the
building is within fifty feet of a single-family residential district. Parcels directly
northeast of the project site are zoned R-6 while parcels directly northwest, east and
south are zoned M-29. The proposed building footprint is located more than 50 feet
from the nearest R-6 zoned property, and therefore, would not be subject to the
twenty feet height max. However, the proposed building will be 38’-6” and is
requesting a variance for relief from the height requirement of 30 feet. Variance
requests are allowed per County Code 84-26.2002 and Staff made the required
Variance findings which are discussed in the findings and conditions of approval
section of this staff report. Because the required Variance findings are made, the
applicant is allowed to request relief from the height restriction, and the project is
granted relief from the height requirements. Overall, the project meets the
requirements of the M-29 Zoning District.
2. Summary of Appeal Point #2: The appellant expressed concerns that the project
should not be exempt from CEQA.
Staff Response: Since the Zoning Administrator’s decision, staff determined that it
was appropriate to conduct additional environmental review of the project under the
California Environmental Quality Act. The County prepared an Initial Study for the
project (SCH No. 2023070169) which evaluated the environmental impacts of the
proposed project. During the preparation of the Initial Study, the County identified
environmental factors that would have been potentially affected by this project and
that with the incorporation of mitigation measures, the project would not result in
any significant impacts to the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration
indicated that no significant environmental impacts will be created by the proposed
project. Therefore, the project was reviewed under the CEQA guidelines and was
determined to have a less than significant environmental impact.
3. Summary of Appeal Point #3: The appellant expressed concerns that the project
needs to be reviewed by the Mt. View Sanitary District.
Staff Response: The project was referred to the Mt. View Sanitary District for
comments to which they replied in a letter submitted to staff on November 17, 2021.
The comments from the Sanitary District include requiring the applicant to submit
190
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 14 of 20
development plans prepared and stamped by a California Registered Civil Engineer
to the District for review of any sewer improvements. Additionally, in the Advisory
Notes of the Findings and Conditions of Approval section, the applicant is strongly
encouraged to contact the Sanitary District for their requirements. During the
building permit process, the applicant will need to obtain Sanitary approval for all
construction plans before any building permits are issued. Therefore, the project will
need to obtain Sanitary District approval and will be required to obtain any permits
required by the Sanitary District during their review process.
4. Summary of Appeal Point #4: The appellant expressed concerns about potential
drainage issues from 98 Windhover Way and how the wall on the Pacheco side of
the site would affect the surrounding properties.
Staff Response: 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 waters to an adequate natural
watercourse.
According to a discussion with Staff from the Department of Public Works, there is
no evidence that the drainage pattern at 98 Windhover Way currently drains onto
the subject parcel. The County elevation date contours imply that stormwater should
naturally drain southeast from 98 Windhover Way, avoiding the proposed project
parcel.
To further prevent any drainage problems, the project is proposing drainage
upgrades which are consistent with development of this nature. The property slopes
from the northwest corner to the southeast corner, away and considerably below
street grade. The project will pad up, raising the grade of the site which will further
prevent any unwanted off-site discharge. The project plans to direct stormwater
runoff from the site to be captured in a bioretention facility onsite which discharges
to an existing 18” storm drain in Windhover Way, effectively diverting the onsite
flows. Section 914-2.004 of the County Ordinance prohibits the diversion of surface
waters from any development. The applicant has requested an exception from the
Advisory Agency (Contra Costa County Public Works Department) per section 92-
6.002 of the County Ordinance Code. The Public Works Department reviewed the
proposed project and is not opposed to granting the applicant an exception from
the collect and convey requirements of the County Ordinance Code because on-site
drainage facilities will be installed to tie into the existing storm drain in Windhover
Way to the west, drainage infrastructure already existing within the WInhover Way
191
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 15 of 20
right-of-way which makes draining towards Windhover Way the most appropriate
direction and the capacity of the downstream drainage system will be verified to
ensure it is sufficient to accommodate the additional runoff created by the project.
If the off-site conveyance system, ultimate drainage facility or natural watercourse to
which stormwater is proposed to be diverted is inadequate, the applicant shall be
responsible for all costs related to the construction and/or right-of-way acquisition
related to any necessary improvements to make the system adequate.
The proposed wall which is called out on Sheet L-1 is a landscaping six-foot-tall
masonry wall. A visual look for this is on Sheet L-2 item 5. This is not a retaining wall
as it does not hold up any fill and will be treated like a fence. A six-foot-tall masonry
decorative wall will be required to obtain a building permit. The grading plan Sheet
C2.0 contains elevations and details on all retaining walls on the site. Detail 4 on
Sheet C2.0 includes call outs for WB (Wall Bottom) and WT (Wall Top) and includes
elevation numbers.
Therefore, Staff concludes that the project provides enough information to address
any drainage and wall concerns.
5. Summary of Appeal Point #5: The appellant expressed concerns that the proposed
Olive Trees to be removed were incorrectly surveyed.
Staff Response: During the County Zoning Administrator Public Hearing on February
22, 2023, the Applicant requested to amend the Tree Permit application to preserve
the Olive Trees (#40, 41, 42) as indicated on Sheet L-1 of the project plans to address
this appeal point. As a result, condition of approval #26 was added by the County
Zoning Administrator to ensure that these three trees are preserved. While work
within the dripline of these three Olive Trees may occur, Staff has included condition
of approval #27 to require a security for possible damage to trees intended for
preservation, condition of approval #28 which prohibits removal of any tree without
an approved building or grading permit and conditions of approval #29-38 which
are arborist recommended best management practices. Therefore, with the required
conditions of approval, the applicant will be required to preserve and protect the
required trees.
6. Summary of Appeal Point #6: The appellant expressed concerns that the project does
not provide parking for pickup trucks nor provides enough parking in general.
Staff Response: The project will provide a total of 34 parking spaces consisting of 9’
x 17’, 9’ x 18’, 7.5’ x 14.5’ dimensions. As part of the applicant’s Density Bonus request,
which is discussed in this Staff Report, the applicant is requesting parking ratios
192
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 16 of 20
pursuant to Government Code 69515(p). Government Code 65915(p): Upon the
request of the developer, no city, county, or city and county shall require a vehicular
ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, of a development meeting the
criteria of subdivision (b) that exceeds the following ratios:
(A) Zero to one bedrooms: 1 off-street parking space
(B) Two to three bedrooms: 1.5 off-street parking space
Based on the number of bedrooms proposed, 30 parking spaces would be required
for the project. Thus, the project proposes 34 parking spaces, which meets this
requirement. Because the proposed project submitted a Density Bonus request, the
applicant is allowed to request parking ratios pursuant to Government Code
65915(p), and thus, the project provides enough parking.
The project is providing twenty-four 9’ x 17’ dimension parking spaces and six 9’ x
18’ dimension parking spaces. Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), an applicant
is allowed to request reductions in development standards for parking stall sizes.
Additionally, Chapter 82-16 – Off-Street Parking of the County Ordinance requires
an 8’-6” space width and 18’ space depth for each space for parking spaces of ninety
degrees. The project does provide multiple spaces that meet the dimension
requirements. Staff researched numerous pick-up truck brands including the
following: Chevrolet, Dodge, Ford, GMC, Honda, Hyundai, Isuzu, Jeep, Mazda,
Mercedes, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Renault, Rivian, Toyota and Volkswagen and found
that the average dimension of a pick-up truck is 17.7 feet long and 6.3 feet wide.
Therefore, the average pick-up truck would be able to fit within many of the
proposed parking space dimensions on the site. Additionally, the Off-Street Parking
ordinance of the County Code does not require dedication of spaces specifically for
pick-up trucks.
7. Summary of Appeal Point #7: The appellant expressed concerns that due to the
proposed setback for the carports noise from the parked vehicles will impact
surrounding neighbors.
Staff Response: The project applicant is proposing to install a new six-foot tall
masonry wall along the edge of all parking areas. The proposed parking area that
the appellant is concerned about is located 4.5’ from the side yard. This wall will act
as a sound buffer to reduce sources of noise generated from the parking areas that
would otherwise reach the surrounding parcels. Additionally, a noise assessment was
prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc on May 10, 2022, to evaluate the compatibility
of the proposed project with respect to the noise levels resulting from the proposed
project. The study used a series of short-term noise measurements and long-term
193
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 17 of 20
measurements on Wednesday, April 27, 2022. The study found that existing noise
levels measured in these areas ranged from 55 to 59 dBA and that with the
introduction of the project, the unmitigated noise level would reach 56 to 60 dBA by
2040. The study concludes that “future exterior noise levels would not exceed 60 dBA
and within the normally acceptable noise and land use compatibility range identified
for residential land uses.” Therefore, Staff concludes that noise impacts from parked
vehicles will be negligible and generally consistent with typical noise uses found in
multiple-family residential development.
8. Summary of Appeal Point #8: The appellant expressed concerns that property values
next to the proposed project will decline.
Staff Response: The project site is currently a dirt/grassy vacant lot with no
landscaping features. The proposed project will construct a new 24-unit apartment
building which includes proposed landscaping for the site. The proposed apartment
building and landscaping will improve the site’s character, taking a vacant lot and
providing residences for Martinez area. This will enhance the surrounding property
values as the surrounding properties will no longer be next to a vacant lot that is
overgrown with unkept vegetation.
The County designated this site as Multiple-Family Residential-High Density in the
Land Use Element of the County General Plan in anticipation that this site would be
used for multiple housing units as this element allows for high densities of multiple-
family units per acre. The proposed project would be compatible with this Land Use
Element as it proposes a multi-family apartment building which was the intent of the
General Plan. Additionally, the Housing Element Goals listed on Table 6-1 state the
following: Goal 1 – maintain and improve the quality of the existing housing stock
and residential neighborhoods in Contra Costa County, Goal 3 - increase the supply
of housing with a priority on the development of affordable housing, including
affordable to extremely-low-income households. The proposed project would be
consistent with these specific goals of the Housing Element in that the project
provides affordable housing while turning a vacant site into an attractive housing
opportunity. Table 6-24 of the Housing element identifies housing needs by income
for Cities in Contra Costa County. Martinez is identified to need 124 very low income
and 72 low-income units. The proposed project will help the County meet those
numbers by providing affordable housing to the area.
Furthermore, there is no evidence provided that the multiple-family residential
development would negatively affect nearby single-family home values. Therefore,
because the project is converting a vacant lot into a land use that would add to the
housing inventory for the County, Staff concludes that property values will not be
194
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 18 of 20
negatively affected in the project area.
9. Summary of Appeal Point #9: The appellant expressed concerns that the proposed
project will have specific adverse impacts and does not qualify for reduced
development standards under Density Bonus Law.
Staff Response: The project is subject to Chapter 822-4, Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402(a) of the County Ordinance, a proposed
residential development of 22 rental units, at least fifteen percent of the rental units
shall be developed and rented as inclusionary units. The applicant has submitted a
Inclusionary Housing Plan which proposes to construct three inclusionary units
within the housing development. Two units will be available to lower-income
households (80% Area Median Income (AMI)), and one unit will be available to a very
low-income household (50% AMI). The fractional unit of 0.3 would be satisfied with
the payment of a partial in-lieu fee. Included in their inclusionary housing plan, the
applicant submitted a density bonus request. With the current proposal, the
applicant is eligible for a 24.5% density bonus as the applicant is proposing to build
on-site three lower-income units. The applicant density bonus request proposes a
density bonus of 2 units with requested concessions and various reductions in
development standards. Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant has
proposed a housing development that will contain units that comply with
Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A) and may request one concession/incentive for
providing 13 percent of the total units of a housing development for lower-income
households within the development. For use of the one concession, the Applicant
requested reduced open space requirement pursuant to Government Code 65915(d).
Additionally, the Applicant has requested parking ratios based on Government Code
65915(p) for a reduced parking requirement. The request also includes reductions in
development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(e) for reduced parking
stall sizes, reduced parking setbacks and reduced covered parking. Staff has reviewed
the request for the reduction of development standards and has determined that
none of the waivers or reductions of development standards would have a specific,
adverse impact as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5.
More specifically, a specific, adverse impact is 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.” As stated in this Staff Report, the project was reviewed by
multiple outside agencies, contains numerous reports and studies in relation to
traffic, noise, geology and trees and is consistent with the zoning ordinance and
general plan land use designation for this site. Moreover, an Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration was prepared for the project which evaluated the project under
the California Environmental Quality Act and was found to have no significant
195
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 19 of 20
impacts with the incorporation of the mitigation measures. Therefore, Staff
concludes that the project will not present a “specific, adverse impact.,” as stated in
Government code Section 65589.5(d)(2).
10. Summary of Appeal Point #10: The appellant expressed concerns that the project will
create traffic impacts on Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd and that a traffic study
should be performed.
Staff Response: The applicant provided a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) report
prepared by W-Trans dated September 6, 2022 and received by Staff on September
7, 2022. The purpose of the report was to document the existing conditions and
evaluate the project’s potential transportation impacts and effect on traffic
operations. The proposed project is expected to generate an average of 162 trips per
day, including 10 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 12 during the p.m. peak hour.
These new trips represent the increase in traffic associated with the project. The study
also included a traffic signal warrant analysis to determine the potential need for a
traffic signal at the intersection of Pacheco Blvd and Windhover Way. The study
concluded that the intersection is “expected to continue operating at the same Level
of Service upon the addition of project-generated traffic” and recommended that
“no further action is recommended,” in relation to a new traffic signal. The study also
reviewed Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). According to the Contra Costa County Travel
Demand Model estimates, the Countywide home-based average VMT per resident
is 19.4 miles. Concurring with guidance provided in the TIA, a project located
anywhere in the County which generates a VMT that is 15% or more below this value,
or 16.5 miles per resident, should be expected to have very little VMT impact and
would not require further VMT analysis. The TIA Table 4 states that the project VMT
rate would be 16.0. Therefore, the project is expected to have a VMT per capita less
than 15% below the countywide VMT per resident and no further VMT analysis is
required. Moreover, the Transportation Planning section of the Department of
Conservation and Development reviewed the TIA report and determined that it was
adequate for the site.
To address any future concerns regarding traffic, during the County Zoning
Administrator Meeting on February 22, 2023, the County Zoning Administrator
added a new condition of approval #46 to require a detailed Traffic Analysis within
6 months after the Certificate of Occupancy permit has been issued. This will allow
the County to determine if traffic signal timing change will be needed to increase the
frequency and time of vehicle gaps on Pacheco Boulevard. Therefore, Staff concludes
that the project will not create significant traffic impacts in this area.
196
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 20 of 20
VIII. CONCLUSION
The proposed project is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan,
and also with the intent of the MH General Plan designation and the M-29 Zoning District.
The project is consistent with the established area as muti-family residential units are a
common occurrence. The design and use of the proposed apartments is consistent with the
other uses in the immediate area. The project will also provide additional needed housing
and affordable housing units. In addition, an environmental analysis of the project has been
administered, and it was found that the proposed project would not have a significant
impact on the environment with the incorporation of specific mitigations. Therefore, Staff
recommends that the County Planning Commission deny the appeal and approve County
File #CDDP21-03031, based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions
of approval.
Attachments:
1. Findings and Conditions of Approval
2. Appeal On Zoning Administrator’s Decision
3. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Documents
4. CEQA Public Comments
5. Maps
6. Zoning Administrator Staff Report and Attachments
7. Plans
8. Power Point Slides
197
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031; WEST
COAST LAND AND DEVELOPMENT, INC – PAMELA WEST (APPLICANT & OWNER).
I. FINDINGS
A. Growth Management Performance Standards
1. Traffic: Policy 4-c under Growth Management Program (GMP) requires a traffic impact
analysis be conducted for any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or
PM peak-hour trips based upon the trip generation rates as presented in the Institute of
Traffic Engineers (ITE). A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will
not create or exacerbate any current traffic problems. The project provided a
Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by W-Trans which concluded that the project
would generate 10 AM trips and 12 PM trips. Since the proposed development would
yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, a project-specific traffic impact analysis is
not required and the project is assumed to have a less than significant impact on the
circulation system in the project vicinity.
2. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water
quantity can be provided. The subject property currently receives water service from the
Contra Costa Water District (CCWD), and the district has stated that water service is
available for the project as the entire site is within the water districts service area.
3. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate
sanitary sewer service is available. The project site currently receives sanitary sewer
service from the Mountain View Sanitary District (MVSD) and MVSD sewer mains in the
area are available for the project. The district provided a letter stating that the applicant
shall submit a sewer permit application with the district for review and approval.
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
district, or requires that an automatic fire sprinkler system be installed to satisfy this
standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
jurisdiction and is located approximately six mins drive time from Contra Costa County
Fire Station #14 located at 521 Jones Street in Martinez. The project is required to
comply with the applicable provisions of the California Fire Code, the California
Residential Code, and Contra Costa County Ordinances that pertain to emergency
access, fire suppression systems, and fire detection/warning systems. When it comes
time to submit for building permits, the construction drawings would have to be
reviewed and approved by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
5. Public Protection: Public protection standards under the GMP require that a Sheriff
Facility standard of 155 square feet of station area and support facilities per 1,000 in
198
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 2
population shall be maintained within the unincorporated area of the County. Based on
the United States Census Bureau’s estimate of 2.48 persons per household (between
2017-2021) for Martinez, the project would potentially increase the population by an
estimated 89.28 people. Since the project would result in a relatively small change in
population, the project would not impact the County’s ability to maintain a Sheriff facility
standard of 155 square feet of station area and support facilities per 1,000 members of
the population. Thus, the project would not significantly affect the provision of police
services to the Martinez area.
6. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, Condition of
Approval (COA) #21 and #22 requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park
Impact and Park Dedication in-lieu fees for the new units. 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 located in Zone X, as designated on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps. 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. With the included
exception to Title 9, 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.
B. Development Plan Findings
1. Required Finding: The proposed project is consistent with the purpose of the
zoning district:
Project Finding: The purpose of the M-29 Multiple Family Residential (M-29) district is
to allow multiple-family residential development to be compatible as much as possible
with nearby single-family residential zoning. The project will largely conform to the M-29
District development standards related to setbacks, lot coverage, and other standards.
Variances to the development standards meet the intent of the standards, as required by
the Variance findings. The project also has submitted a Density Bonus Request and is
requesting parking ratios pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) and multiple reduction
to development pursuant to Government Code 65915(e). With these requests, the
199
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 3
proposed project creates a multi-family apartment complex that is a permitted use under
84-26.402(3).
2. Required Finding: The proposed project is architecturally compatible with other
uses in the vicinity, both inside and outside the zoning district.
Project Finding: Given the density of housing development in the area (townhomes,
duplexes, single-family residence), the proposed design does not conflict with the
surroundings in building mass or height. The architectural style in this area of the County
can be described as a diverse collection of Ranch, Mediterranean, Spanish Revival, and
contemporary modern styles. The project’s contemporary design would be comprised of
three segments separated by staircase breezeways, joined under one unified flat roof to
minimize the overall bulk of the structure. Building design incorporates a rectangular
shape with all exterior walls of each level at the same location to create one cohesive
building from top to bottom while the open breezeway at each level adds depth and
variation to the exterior of the building. The façade of the building will have variation
with sandstone color stucco alternating with pearl gray shingle siding. The colors of the
building will be designed to compliment the surrounding natural palette of the area.
C. Variance Findings:
1. Required Finding: Any variance authorized shall not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and
the respective land use district in which the subject property is located.
Project Finding for Height: The variance request is to allow a 38’-6” tall building (where
30 feet is the maximum allowed). Given that the height is due to unique topographical
characteristics and drainage restrictions, granting of the variance for the building height
would not be considered a grant of special privilege. In order to meet drainage
requirements that require stormwater to drain to adequate stormwater infrastructure at
Windhover Way, the rear of the lot must be padded (i.e., filled with dirt to raise the
grade). Currently, the rear of the lot is almost nine feet lower than the frontage
(Windhover Way). The project will pad almost nine feet towards the rear to bring the site
level and 4’-6” of padding under the building itself. This extensive amount of padding
raises the finished grade under the rear of the building, resulting in a height that exceeds
the 30-foot standard when measured from natural grade. Complying with the height
restriction would present a practical difficulty because the project is required to have
drainage improvements due to topography. Additionally, in order to meet the required
density of the General Plan Land Use Designation for this site, the project was required
to add more units, which prompted the height increase. Strict application of the zoning
code would present an unnecessary burden on the site by reducing the amount of units
200
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 4
on site by eight, which would result in a total of 16 units, which is on the lower end for
the General Plan Land Use Designation. For these reasons, the height of the building is
not a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties in the
vicinity and respective land use district.
Project Finding for Driveway Aisle Width:
The variance request is to allow for a 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the
minimum required) for a driveway aisle with parking spaces of ninety degrees located on
the eastern side of the multi-family apartment building. Granting the variance for the
reduced driveway aisle width would not be a grant of special privilege. The irregular flag-
shaped property has an approximately 48-foot-wide by 72-foot-long strip of land that
extends access to Windhover way. The strip of land presents a unique restriction only
applicable to this site. The unique shape unreasonably limits development on the
property in a way that the required density is only feasible with reduced driveway aisle
width. In order to facilitate and maintain circulation and to allow the site to provide
adequate parking spaces, the driveway aisle width needs to be slightly reduced.
Complying with the ordinance for driveway aisle width would present a practical
difficulty because it would reduce the amount of parking on the site and limit the total
developable area. For these reasons, the reduced driveway aisle width is not a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties in the vicinity and
respective land use district.
2. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property because of its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict
application of the respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject
property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the
identical land use district.
Project Finding for Height: Given that the additional height is due to unique
topographical characteristics and drainage restrictions, granting of the variance for the
building height is based on special circumstances. In order to meet drainage
requirements that require stormwater to drain to adequate stormwater infrastructure at
Windhover Way, the rear of the lot must be raised by padding from approximately 9 feet
at the rear property line to 4’-6” underneath the building. Given that the site slopes away
from Windhover Way, the building is required to be raised to address drainage issues.
Thus, due to these special circumstances, the strict application of zoning regulations
would deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by other properties developed as
multiple-family projects.
Project Finding for Driveway Aisle Width: The variance request is to allow for a 24.5’
driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the required minimum). The irregular flag-shaped
201
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 5
property has a 48-foot-wide by 72-foot-long strip of land that extends access to
Windhover Way. This unique shape limits the placement and development of a driveway
aisle width on the property as there are already numerous other constraints. To provide a
driveway aisle for parking spaces to be accessed, the only feasible location is between
the parking spaces. The flagged driveway results in additional area on the lot that must
be paved in order to reach the larger developable portion of the lot. Thus, a 25’ driveway
aisle would not be feasible while also providing parking, open space, covered parking
and space for the building. Thus, due to these special circumstances, the strict
application of the zoning regulations would deprive the subject property of rights
enjoyed by other properties developed as multiple-family projects.
3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall substantially meet the intent
and purpose of the respective land use district in which the subject property is
located.
Project Finding for Height: Height limits are applied to provide an orderly residential
development pattern and, adequate air and light between neighboring development.
The 8’-6” of additional height (4’ if measured from finished grade) would substantially
meet the intent and purpose of the respective 30-foot height maximum as all building
setbacks are met and exceeded. The building would maintain separation from
neighboring properties. The variance request will allow for the project to address
drainage and topography issues without burdening the applicant. Therefore, it is
reasonable to believe that the height would not have a detrimental effect on the
adjoining properties and meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.
Project Finding for Driveway Aisle Width: The variance request is to allow for a
reduced 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required). The driveway
aisle width allows for cars to maneuver in and out of parking spaces. The proposed
driveway aisle width is only 0.5’ less than the minimum requirement. Due to site
constraints, the project has balanced the need to provide the full driveway aisle width
with the need to provide for adequate parking spots and landscaping requirements. The
loss of 0.5’ les for a driveway aisle width will not have a detrimental effect on the
adjoining properties and meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.
4. Findings for Granting an Exception Per Section 92-6.002:
Request for an exception from Title 9 Offsite Collect and Convey Diversion
requirements (Section 914-2.0040)
1. Required Finding: That there are unusual circumstances or conditions affecting the
property.
202
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 6
Project Finding: The property slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner,
away and considerably below street grade. There is no storm drain or easement at the
lowest corner of the site. On-site drainage facilities will be installed to tie into the
existing storm drain on Windhover Way to the west. The storm drain is deep enough to
allow for gravity drainage from the stormwater treatment facilities but was not originally
intended to accept stormwater runoff from this site. Considering this site’s unusual
circumstances and conditions, an exception from the County Ordinance Code’s
prohibition regarding diversions would be required.
2. Required Finding: That the exception is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right.
Project Finding: The diversion of stormwater is necessary to connect the project to
stormwater facilities in the area. A connection at the southeast corner of the property is
not currently possible, meaning this infill project is not feasible unless the exception is
granted. Additionally, as described above, the drainage infrastructure already exists
within the Windhover Way right-of-way making this the most appropriate location.
3. Required Finding: 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: Capacity of the downstream drainage system will be verified to ensure
it is sufficient to accommodate the additional runoff. Additionally, stormwater would be
directed to existing infrastructure used by other properties in the area. Therefore, the
exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
properties in the territory in which the subject property is situated.
The applicant will be required to provide a drainage report to verify the adequacy of the
downstream drainage system. If the receiving system is found to be inadequate the
applicant shall be required to improve the system to make it adequate.
5. Tree Protection and Preservation Findings:
Required Factors for Granting Tree Permit: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied the
following factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree
permit have been satisfied:
• 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.
203
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 7
• Where the arborist or forester report has been required, and the director is satisfied
that the issuance of a permit will not negatively affect the sustainability of the
resource.
The project proposes to remove tree #35, 36, 37 and 38. The project proposes to
work within the dripline of tree # 40, 41 and 42. All feasible efforts have been made
to retain the maximum number of trees and that development of this project cannot
be reasonably accommodated on other parts of the property due to the shape and
orientation of the property. The trees are required to be removed in order for the
appropriate infrastructure to be built to support a project of this size. Development
on this property can not occur without the removal of trees. An arborist report was
provided which concluded that the trees to be removed are moderate to low health.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Finding
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15071 and Section 15072, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration/Initial Study (MND) was prepared and published for the project. The 20-day
public review period for the MND started on July 11, 2023, and ended on July 31, 2023.
Seven public comments were received during the public review period for the MND. The
comments received did not specifically challenge the adequacy of the environmental
document. Neither the comment nor the staff response to the comment result in any
changes to the MND, and the impacts, mitigation measures, and findings of the MND are
unchanged.
On the basis of the whole record before it, including the MND, and in accordance with
Section 15074, the County Planning Commission finds that:
• There is no substantial evidence that the project with the proposed mitigation
measures will have a significant effect on the environment;
• The MND reflects the County’s independent judgement and analysis;
• The MND is adequate and complete; and
• The MND has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA guidelines.
Pursuant to CEQA Section 15097, a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared,
based on the identified impacts and mitigation measures in the MND. The Mitigation
Monitoring Program is intended to ensure that the mitigation measures identified in the
MND are implemented. All mitigation measures are included in the Conditions of Approval
for the project.
204
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 8
II. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031
Project Approval
1. Development Plan for a 24-unit apartment project is APPROVED, as generally shown
and based on the following documents:
• Applicant and materials submitted to the Department of Conservation and
Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on October 21, 2021;
• Revised project plans received on March 15, 2022;
• Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan prepared by CALICHI Design Group,
prepared by Reco V. Prianto on February 15, 2022 and received on March 15,
2022;
• Arborist Report prepared by Pam Nagle of Hort Science on January 17, 2022,
Certified Arborist #WE-9617A, received on March 15, 2022;
• Noise Assessment Report prepared by Michael Thill of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc,
on May 10, 2022, received on May 21, 2022;
• Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by W-Trans and received on September
7, 2022;
• Density Bonus Request received on March 15, 2022, and subsequent revised
Density Bonus Requests dated August 24, 2022, October 12, 2022 and December
20, 2022.
2. Approval is granted to allow the following variances that meet the requirements of
Section 26-2.2006 of the County Ordinance Code:
A. 38’-6” building height (where 30’ is the maximum)
B. 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required)
3. Approval is granted to allow for the following exception that meet the requirements of
Section 92-6.002 of the County Ordinance Code:
A. Exception to Collect and Convey Requirements.
4. Concession is granted for the following:
A. A reduction to the amount of Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%.
5. Reduction in development standards is granted for the following:
A. State density bonus parking ratio; 34 off-street parking spaces provided for this
project.
205
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 9
B. A reduction in development standards to allow for reduced parking stall sizes of
9’ x 18’, 9’ x 17’ and 7.5’ x 14.5’. where 9’ x 19’ is the standard.
C. A reduction in development standards to allow for reducing parking setbacks
including a 2’ side yard (where 20 is the minimum) and a 17.5’ front yard setback
(where 25 is the minimum), per plans.
D. A reduction of the covered parking for 16 total covered spaces (where one-half of
the required spaces shall be covered).
6. Any change from the approved plans shall require review and approval by CDD and may
require the filing of an application to modify the Development Plan.
Application Fees
7. This Development Plan Permit application is subject to an initial application deposit of
$5,000.00, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials 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 2019/553, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the Department of
Conservation and Development may seek a court judgement against the applicant and
will charge interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of judgement. The
applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed
to the applicant shortly after permit issuance.
Indemnification
8. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the property
owner or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County,
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, of annual, the
Agency’s approval concerning this development plan application, which action is
brought within the time period provided in Section 66499.37. The County will promptly
notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the
defense.
Compliance Report
9. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, 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
206
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 10
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. The permit compliance review is subject to
staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $1,500, which shall be paid at
the time of submittal of the compliance report.
Signage
10. No signage is approved with this permit. Any proposed signage is subject to review and
approval by the Department of Conservation and Development under a Sign Permit
application. All signage must comply with the Sign Ordinance, Chapter 88-6, Ordinance
No. 2022-03.
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus
11. This project is subject to 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(a) of the County Ordinance Code, in a residential
development of 22 rental units, at least fifteen percent of the rental units shall be
developed and rented as inclusionary units.
The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 3.3
inclusionary units for the project. The Applicant has submitted a revised Inclusionary
Housing Plan received December 27, 2022, which proposed to construct three
inclusionary units within the housing development. Two units will be available to lower-
income households (80% Area Median Income (AMI)), and one unit will be available to a
very low-income household (50% AMI). The fractional unit of 0.3 would be satisfied with
the payment of a partial in-lieu fee.
The Applicant submitted a revised density bonus request with their revised inclusionary
housing plan received December 27, 2022. As described in the HCI April 19, 2022, memo,
the Applicant is eligible for a 24.5% density bonus as the Applicant proposed to build
on-site three lower-income units or 13% of the units in the housing development as
affordable to lower-income households. For this project, the inclusionary housing units
are also the lower income units that qualify the project for a density bonus. The
Applicant’s Inclusionary Housing Plan and density bonus request propose a density
bonus of 2 units, or a 9% bonus, with one requested concession and various reductions
in development standards, bringing the total number of units in the project from 22 to
24.
Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive
207
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 11
Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant has proposed a housing
development that will contain units that comply with Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A)
and may request one concession/incentive for providing 13 percent of the total units of
a housing development for lower-income households within the development. For use of
the one concession, the Applicant requested reduced open space requirement pursuant
to Government Code 65915(d). Additionally, the Applicant has requested parking ratios
based on Government Code 65915(p) for a reduced parking requirement. The request
also includes reductions in development standards pursuant to Government Code
65915(e) for reduced parking stall sizes, reduced parking setbacks and reduced covered
parking.
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for reductions in development standards
for the following:
Density Bonus – Parking Ratio
• Parking ratios pursuant to 65915 (p).
•
1 Bedroom Units = 1 off-street parking space (where 1.5 spaces are required)
2 Bedroom Units = 1.5 off street parking space (where 2 spaces are required)
Density Bonus – Reduction of Development Standards
• Parking stall sizes of 9 feet x 18 feet and 9 feet x 17 feet (where 9 feet x 19 feet is
required)
• Front Parking setbacks of 17.5 feet (where 25 feet minimum is required).
• Side Parking setbacks of 2 feet (where 20 feet minimum is required).
• 16 total covered parking (where one-half of the required spaces shall be
covered).
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for one concession, as follows:
• Open space requirement of 20% (where the open space requirement is 25% of
land area, with 75% of that area landscaped)
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement
12. At least 90 days prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building,
demolition, or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of a
condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall initiate the County’s
preparation and execution of an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing
Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant
208
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 12
to County Ordinance Chapter 822-4 - Inclusionary Housing, County Ordinance Chapter
822-2 - Density Bonus, and Government Code 65915 to ensure that two (2) of the
approved units are affordable to and occupied by lower-income households, and one (1)
of the approved units is affordable to and occupied by a very low-income household.
The Agreement shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for approval on behalf of
the County. Following the execution of the Agreement, the completed Agreement will be
filed and recorded on the subject property.
The three (3) on-site inclusionary units identified will include:
1 Studio unit at Very Low Income (50% AMI)
2 Two-bedroom units at Lower Income (80% AMI)
Maximum affordable rents shall be determined annually by the County and adjusted for
family size appropriate for the unit.
The continued affordability of all lower-income rental units and very low-income rental
units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income categories for fifty-
five (55) years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage
financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
Definitions
Terms and definitions used in these conditions of approval may be found in the above-
referenced County Ordinance Codes and Government Code.
A. Affordable rent – means a rent, including a reasonable utility allowance determined
by the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) Director, or designee,
that does not exceed the following calculations pursuant to Health & Safety Code
Section 50053:
For Lower-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times sixty percent of
the area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
For Very Low-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times fifty percent of
the area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
B. Inclusionary Unit – means a rental unit that is required to be rented at an affordable
rent to the households specified in Section 822-4.402.
C. Lower-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed the
lower income limits applicable to Contra Costa County, adjusted for household size,
209
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 13
as published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5.
D. Very Low-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed
the very low-income limits applicable to Contra Costa County adjusted for household
size, as published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50105.
Inclusionary Housing Partial In-Lieu Fee
13. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building, demolition, or
grading permit for the housing development, whichever occurs first, the Applicant
shall pay the County the partial in-lieu fee for the remaining fractional 0.3 inclusionary
unit. The current in-lieu fee calculation is based on the 22 base units, and excludes the
density bonus units, is $48,401.10. However, the actual fee collected will be that which is
applicable prior to CDD approval of the grading permit, building permit, or demolition
permit, whichever occurs first.
This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferrable.
General
14. The following are general terms for the granting of density bonus and the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance.
A. The Applicant hereby represents, warrants, and covenants that it will cause the
Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County,
California, and in such other places as the County may reasonably request. The
Applicant shall pay all fees and charges incurred in connection with any such
recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the
document by the County and prior to CDD’s approval of a building permit or grading
permit.
B. The County will provide the Applicant a form for income certification to be
completed by the renters. The income levels of all very low-income household and
lower-income household applicants for units in the project shall be certified by DCD
prior to initial occupancy and annually thereafter and records shall be maintained by
the Applicant over the entire term of the period of affordability.
C. The three (3) inclusionary units in the project shall be available for rent on a
continuous basis 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
210
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 14
renting the units, except to the extent that the units are required to be rented to a
very low-income household and lower-income households. 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 rent of any 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 with reference to the selection, location,
number, use, or occupancy of renters of any unit or in connection with employment
of persons for the construction of the project.
D. In addition to any other marketing efforts, the lower-income units, and very low-
income units shall be marketed through local non-profit, social service, faith-based,
and other organizations that have potential renters as clients or constituents. The
Applicant shall translate marketing materials into Spanish and Chinese. A copy of the
translated marketing materials, tenant selection plan, and marketing plan shall be
submitted to Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) at least
three months prior to the marketing of the inclusionary units for the review and
approval of DCD, and on an annual basis with the annual report.
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, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea
Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily.
E. Upon violation of any of the provisions of the Agreement by the Applicant, the
County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the
violation. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a
reasonable period of time, 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 this 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.
Development Standards
15. The inclusionary units are subject to the standards of Section 822-4.412 of the County
Ordinance.
211
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 15
16. All inclusionary units must be constructed and occupied prior to or concurrently with the
market rate units within the same residential development.
Location (Inclusionary Units)
17. Inclusionary units must be dispersed throughout the residential development and have
access to all on-site amenities that are available to market-rate units.
Annual Reporting and Compliance Review
18. Prior to the initial occupancy of each inclusionary unit, the Applicant shall submit to
the Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval compliance
review application and fee along with the following information for review and approval
of qualified tenants: forms and documentation that demonstrates the tenants of the
inclusionary units have been certified as a qualified lower income household or very low-
income households. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection of the building
permit until all documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of
Conservation and Development.
19. After the initial occupancy of the inclusionary units, the Applicant shall submit to
the Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval
compliance review application and fee along with an annual compliance review
report for all inclusionary units and density bonus units. The report must include the
name, unit number, household size, and income of each person occupying inclusionary
units, identify the number of bedrooms and monthly rent or cost (including utility
allowance) of each inclusionary unit, and the affordability restriction of the unit. Tenants
in rental housing developments shall provide consent to the owners to allow these
disclosures. The annual compliance review report is due April 1.
20. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and
Development informed of the contact information of the owner or local designee who is
responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be
contacted (i.e., mailing and email addresses, and telephone number) at all times.
A. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building,
demolition, or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of
a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the
name of the owner or local designee representing the owner of the property for
permit compliance and their contact information including phone number, e-mail
address, and mailing address.
212
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 16
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 project name, project
address, 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.
Park Impact Fee
21. Prior to CDD stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay the applicable park impact fee as established by the Board of
Supervisors.
Park Dedication Fee
22. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay the applicable park dedication fee as established by the Board of
Supervisors.
Child Care Fee
23. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay a per unit fee toward childcare facility needs in the area as
established by the Board of Supervisors.
Aesthetics
24. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the (CDD) for
review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the proposed
light post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed down
and screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent
glare or excessive light spillover. (MM Aesthetics-1)
213
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 17
25. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, a final Landscape Plan shall be
submitted to the (CDD) for review and approval. The landscaping plan shall conform to
the County’s Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance. Prior to requesting a final
inspection, the approved landscaping shall be installed and evidence of the installation
(e.g., photos) shall be provided for the review and approval of CDD.
Restitution for Tree Removal
26. This permit does not approve removal of any off-site trees as identified by the
Consulting Arborist Tree Assessment dated received on March 15, 2022 as Tree #39 and
#43. The project proponent must also preserve the Olive Trees #40, #41 and #42.
Required Restitution for Approved Tree Removal: The following measures are intended
to provide restitution for the removal of four code-protected trees (Trees #35, 36, 37,
38):
A. Tree Restitution Planting and Irrigation Plan: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal,
whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a tree planting and irrigation
plan prepared by a licensed arborist or landscape architect for the review and
approval of CDD. The plan shall provide for the planting of ten 24-inch boxed
trees or larger. The plan shall comply with the County’s Water Efficient
Landscapes Ordinance. The plan shall be accompanied by an estimate prepared
by a licensed landscape architect or arborist of the materials and labor costs to
complete the improvements on the plan. The plan shall be implemented prior
to final building inspection of the building.
B. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to CDD-
stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or
tree removal, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a security (e.g.
bond, cash deposit) that is acceptable to the CDD. The bond shall include the
amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge.
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.
214
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 18
D. Duration of Security: The security 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 apartment building 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).
E. Integration with Final Landscape Plan: The tree restitution planting and irrigation
plans described in subsection (a) above may be incorporated as part of the Final
Landscape Plan required pursuant to Condition #26 above. However, the planting
plan shall identify the replacement trees required to replace removed protected
trees, which are intended to satisfy this condition. In addition, the provided
estimate shall only cover materials and labor associated with the implementation
of the required tree restitution, and not for the full landscape plan.
Contingency Restitution Should Altered Trees Be Damaged
27. Security for Possible Damage to Trees Intended for Preservation: Pursuant to the
requirements of Section 816-6.1204 of the Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance,
to address the possibility that construction activity damages trees that are to be
preserved, the applicant shall provide the County with a security to allow for replacement
of trees that are significantly damaged or destroyed by construction activity. Prior to
CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or
work within the dripline of trees, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide
a cash or surety bond that is acceptable to CDD. The security shall be an amount
sufficient to cover:
A. Preparation of a landscaping and irrigation plan by a licensed landscape architect,
arborist, or landscape contractor for the review and approval of the CDD. The
plan shall provide for planting of four (4) trees of a native indigenous species of
15-gallons in size. The plan shall comply with the County’s Water Efficient
Landscapes Ordinance, and verification of such shall accompany the plan.
B. The estimated materials and labor costs to complete the improvements shown on
the approved planting and irrigation plan (accounting for supply, delivery, and
installation of trees and irrigation). The bond shall include the amount of the
approved cost estimate, plus a 20% inflation surcharge.
C. Initial Deposit for Processing of Security: Prior to the removal or work within the
dripline of trees or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits
215
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 19
(e.g. demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs, the applicant shall
provide a cash or surety bond that is acceptable to CDD, the County ordinance
requires that the applicant pay fees to cover all staff time and material costs for
processing the required security. At the time of submittal of the security, the
applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $200.00.
D. Duration of Security: The security shall be retained by the County for a minimum
of 12 months and up to 24 months beyond the completion of the tree alteration
improvements (i.e., date of final inspection). After the final inspection has been
completed, the applicant shall submit a letter to the CDD, composed by a
consulting arborist, describing any construction impacts to trees intended for
preservation. As a prerequisite of releasing the bond between 12- and 24-
months, the applicant shall arrange for the consulting arborist to inspect the trees
and to prepare a report on the tree’s health. The report shall be submitted to the
CDD for review, and it shall include any additional measures necessary for
preserving the health of the trees.
28. Tree removal shall occur only with an approved grading or building permit.
Pre-construction treatments
29. Prior to the removal of any trees the project proponent shall hire a certified consulting
arborist to be on-site. The contract shall identify the arborist, field schedule, and contact
information. The Arborist must review all plans for pre-construction treatment,
demolition, grading, drainage, utility, and landscape with irrigation. Prior to issuance of a
grading and/or building permit, a copy of the contract must be submitted to CDD for
review.
30. The project’s perimeter security fence will serve as the Tree Protection Zone. No grading,
excavation, construction, or storage of materials should occur outside the project limit.
31. Off-site trees to be preserved may require pruning to provide clearance for demolition,
grading and construction. Tree care firm providing the pruning shall be a State of
California Licensed Tree Contractor (C61/D49). All pruning shall be done by Certified
Arborist or Certified Tree Worker in accordance with the latest edition of the Best
Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of Arboriculture) and the
American National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300).
32. Tree(s) to be removed that have branches extending into the canopy of tree(s) to remain
shall be removed by a Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker and not by the
demolition contractor. The Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker shall remove the
trees in a manner that causes no damage to the tree(s) and understory to remain.
216
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 20
33. Trees to be removed shall be felled to fall away from TREE PROTECTION ZONE and
avoid pulling and breaking roots of off-site trees to remain. If roots are entwined, the
Consulting Arborist may require first severing the major woody root mass before
extracting the trees.
34. All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California Fish
and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent feasible tree
pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding season. Breeding bird
surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified biologists should be involved
in establishing work buffers for active nests.
Tree Protection During Construction
35. Any approved grading, construction, demolition, or other work within 5-ft of the TREE
PROTECTION ZONE near tree #39 must be monitored by the Consulting Arborist.
36. Any root pruning that will occur within 5-ft. of the Tree Protection Zone near tree #39
shall receive prior approval and may be supervised by the Consulting Arborist. Roots
should be cut with a saw to provide a flat and smooth cut. Removal of roots larger than
2” in diameter should be avoided.
37. If roots 2” and greater in diameter are encountered during site work and must be cut to
complete the construction, the Consulting Arborist must be consulted to evaluate effects
on the health and stability of the tree and recommend treatment.
38. If injury should occur to any tree during construction, it should be evaluated as soon as
possible by the Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be applied.
Archeological and Cultural Resources
39. The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground disturbance
and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans
for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs
first, the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed
below are include on the construction plans.
217
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 21
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading,
or trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if
they observe any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural
resource discovery (e.g. wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains;
debris-filled wells or privies; deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of
prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during ground
disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected
and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and, if necessary,
develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the County and
other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be
mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be
prepared documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report
should be submitted to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate
Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are
of a Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American
Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American
Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the
property and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains
and associated grave goods.
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist
should prepare a report documenting the methods and results and provide
recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated
cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations
of the MLD. The report should be submitted to the Northwest Information Center
and appropriate Contra Costa agencies. (MM Cultural-1)
218
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 22
Geology and Soils
40. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall submit a
geotechnical report update with the geotechnical review fee in the amount of $3,000,
referencing the proposed grading, drainage and foundation plans and providing specific
criteria and standards for site grading, drainage and foundation design based on
adequate subsurface data, laboratory testing of samples and engineering analysis. The
scope of the geotechnical investigation shall address the following potential hazards: (i)
expansive soils, (ii) corrosive soils, (iii) siting and design of any required bio-retention
facilities and/or other measures that may be recommended to achieve compliance with
the clean water requirements of the RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing
undocumented fills and effective measures to control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v)
provide seismic parameters based on the adopted California Building Code at the time
that a residential building permit is requested. (MM Geology-1)
41. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the geotechnical report update
required by Condition of Approval #40, above, shall be subject to review by the County’s
peer review geologist, and review/approval of the CDD. Improvement, grading and
building plans shall carry out the recommendations of the approved report. (MM
Geology-2)
42. Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of foundation-related work) the
project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential testing of the graded
building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid damage to
improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel). (MM Geology-3)
43. The geotechnical report required by Condition of Approval #39 routinely includes
recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. These
services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer
to (i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed
conditions during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the
basis of the design recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the
opportunity for field modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID
approval), based on exposed conditions. The monitoring shall commence during
clearing, and extend through grading, including testing services during placement of
engineered fill, installation of recommended drainage facilities, and foundation related
work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final” grading inspection, pending submittal of
a report from the project geotechnical engineer that documents their observation and
testing services during grading, installation of drainage improvements. (MM Geology-4)
219
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 23
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the
apartment building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer
documenting the monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-
related geotechnical recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier
hole drilling/ foundation preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g.
collection of roof gutter runoff in a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable
discharge point; and possibly installation of a subdrain system around the perimeter of
the foundation to control moisture beneath the foundation). (MM Geology-4)
44. All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during the dry season (April 15
through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be revegetated to minimize
erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion control work
shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved by the
Building Inspection Division. (MM Geology-5)
45. Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during grading, trenching, or
other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials shall be
stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find,
and, if deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s). (MM Geology-6)
Traffic Study
46. Withing 6 months after the Certificate of Occupancy permit has been issued, the
Developer or project proponents must submit a detailed Traffic Analysis and modeling
study prepared by a qualified Transportation Consultant for the review and approval by
Public Works Department and the Department of Conservation and Development,
Community Development Division to determine if a traffic signal timing change is
needed to increase the frequency and time of vehicle gaps while also reviewing traffic
flow on Pacheco Boulevard.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM Program)
47. Consistent with the County’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance,
which requires a residential project with 13 or more units to develop a TDM program, a
TDM Program must be submitted to the CDD for review prior to CDD-stamp approval
of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first.
The TDM program shall include at least the following:
220
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 24
A. The TDM Program should include a site map/plan that identifies existing and
proposed bicycle, pedestrian, and transit amenities and improvements. The TDM
program should also include a map/plan identifying key destinations (e.g. schools,
community facilities, parks, shopping areas, major pedestrian and bicycle facilities,
transit stops) in proximity to the project that can be reached by walking, biking, or
taking transit.
B. The TDM Program should identify the promotions, events, and incentives that would
be marketed to residents as part of the program. A list of potential promotions,
events, and incentives can be found on the 511 Contra Costa website.
C. A sample of the virtual format (e.g. website) that would be used to display TDM
information to residents.
D. Within six months following the granting of a certificate of occupancy of the new
development site, the project shall submit to the Director of the Department of
Conservation and Development a TDM notice that confirms the installation of
facilities and site amenities, as well as implementation of commute program features
and events (if required).
Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance
48. In accordance with the County’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance, the project is required to
provide ten percent of the total parking spaces at the site shall be EV charging spaces
(3). Half of the EV charging spaces (minimum 1 space) shall install fully operational
(minimum Level 2 or higher) EV charging stations. The remaining EV charging spaces
shall be capable of supporting future electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
Bicycle Parking
49. A total of 8 bicycle spaces shall be provided, consisting of 6 long-term bicycle spaces
and 2 short-term bicycle spaces.
Debris Recovery
50. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, whichever occurs first,, the developer shall submit a Construction Waste
Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen
requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65%, or current CalGreen
mandate, of construction and demolition (C&D) waste materials generated at jobsite.
51. Prior to requesting a Final Inspection for the multiple-family residential building,
the developer shall submit a Construction Waste Management Final Report containing
information and supporting documentation that demonstrates compliance with
221
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 25
CalGreen requirements to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65%, or current
CalGreen mandate, of C&D waste materials generated at jobsite.
Air Quality
52. The following mitigations shall be included on all construction plans and implemented
throughout the construction phase of the project:
• 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.
• 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.
• 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]). 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.
• The property owner or site contractor shall 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.
• Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6-
to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
222
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 26
• All contractors shall use equipment that meets the California Air Resources Board' s
(CARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.
(MM Air Quality-1)
Construction Restrictions and Requirements
53. All windows and doors shall have the minimum ratings STC 26 and mechanical
ventilation installed for the building. (MM Noise-1)
54. The following construction restrictions shall be implemented during project construction
and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans
for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the
applicant shall provide evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are
include on the face of the construction plans.
A. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related
disruptions to adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be
communicated to all project-related contractors. The applicant shall notify
neighbors within 300 feet of the subject property at least one week in advance of
demolition, grading, and construction activities.
B. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random
debris and trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner. The project site must
maintain and keep dust down by watering the site by use of a water truck, water
hose, street sweeping and other dust control and maintenance measures.
C. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number
and person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person
shall respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number
to call in complaints shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
D. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal
combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate
stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from
existing residences as possible.
E. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal
combustion engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
223
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 27
F. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and
other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
G. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall
be located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and
noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
H. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are
imposed on construction activities, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to
4:00 pm. This condition applies to all heavy construction equipment that vibrates.
I. 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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
(MM Noise-2)
224
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 28
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PERMIT CDDP21-03031
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 submitted to the Department of
Conservation and Development dated on March 15, 2022.
COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A
BUILDING PERMIT.
General Requirements:
55. 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 signage or
striping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation
Engineering Division of the Public Works Department.
Roadway Improvements (Windhover Way):
56. The Applicant shall remove existing curb and sidewalk and install a standard driveway
approach on Windhover Way to serve the project site. Driveway improvements and
conforms shall match existing gutter line and grade.
57. Any cracked and displaced curb, gutter, and sidewalk shall be removed and replaced
along the project frontage of Windhover Way. Concrete shall be saw cut prior to
removal. Existing lines and grade shall be maintained. New curb and gutter shall be
doweled into existing improvements.
Access to Adjoining Property:
Proof of Access
58. 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.
Encroachment Permit
59. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Public Works for construction
of driveways or other improvements within the right-of-way of Windhover Way.
225
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 29
Site Access
60. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved
site/development plan.
Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance:
61. The Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveway with
Windover Way in accordance with Chapter 82-18 “Sight Obstructions at Intersections” of
the County Ordinance Code. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide
sight distance at this intersection, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining
walls, or other obstructions proposed at this intersection shall be setback to ensure that
the sight line is clear of any obstructions.
Bicycle – Pedestrian Facilities:
Pedestrian Access
62. Curb ramps and driveways shall be designed and constructed in accordance with current
County standards. A detectable warning surface (e.g. truncated domes) shall be installed
on all curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the curb returns to
accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on
top of any curb ramp proposed.
Drainage Improvements:
Collect and Convey
63. The 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. The Applicant shall obtain access rights to make any
necessary improvements to off-site facilities.
Exception (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval)
226
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 30
The Applicant shall be permitted an exception to allow a diversion of stormwater
entering and/or originating on the subject property provided that the applicant verifies
the adequacy of the stormwater facility or natural watercourse to which the stormwater
shall be directed. If the off-site conveyance system, ultimate drainage facility or natural
watercourse to which stormwater is proposed to be diverted is inadequate, the applicant
shall be responsible for all costs related to the construction and/or right-of-way
acquisition related to any necessary improvements to make the system adequate.
Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements:
64. The Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with
the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards.
65. The Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and
driveway(s) in a concentrated manner.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES):
66. 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.
-Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain
markers.
-Shallow roadside and on-site swales.
-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.
-Filtering Inlets.
-The applicant shall sweep the paved portion of the site at least once a year between
September 1st and October 15th utilizing a vacuum type sweeper. Verification (invoices,
227
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 31
etc.) of the sweeping shall be provided to the County Clean Water Program
Administrative Assistant at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 (925) 313-2238).
-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 the Public Works
Department.
Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance:
67. 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 issuance of a
building permit. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP
and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant.
68. 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).
69. 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.
70. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
71. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
72. 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.
228
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 32
Drainage Area Fee Ordinance:
73. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 57 as
adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
229
CPC – August 9, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 33
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 may be subject to the requirements of the following agencies:
• Department of Conservation and Development, Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa County Public Works Department
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
• Contra Costa County Health Services Department
• Contra Costa Water District
• Mountain View Sanitary District
The applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to
continuing with the project.
C. The 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.
D. 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 Game Code.
E. 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.
230
231
232
233
234
235
1
Everett Louie
From:pamelawest wclands.com <pamelawest@wclands.com>
Sent:Monday, July 10, 2023 1:56 PM
To:Everett Louie
Cc:robertwest wclands.com
Subject:Re: CDDP21-03031 Environmental Document Initial Study Review and Mitigation Measures
Good afternoon,
Robert West and I have reviewed the documents listed above and agree with all the mitigation measures listed in the
Initial Study Review and Mitigation Measures document.
Thank you,
Pamela West
West Coast Land and Development, Inc.
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
(925) 246-2870
From: pamelawest wclands.com <pamelawest@wclands.com>
Date: Monday, July 10, 2023 at 11:48 AM
To: Everett Louie <Everett.Louie@dcd.cccounty.us>
Cc: robertwest wclands.com <robertwest@wclands.com>
Subject: Re: CDDP21‐03031 Environmental Document Initial Study Review and Mitigation Measures
Hello,
We have a couple of questions:
1. On our last project we were required to water the roadway “as needed” and sweep daily. To do as you suggest
would cost approximately $1,200 a day, or $300,000 ‐ $500,000 for the life of the project. That is far above our
budget. Can we water once a week and sweep daily?
2. There is a far more extensive holiday list than in every other city/county we are working in. Every holiday has a
huge impact on our timelines, budget and employees.
3. On page 10 it mentions a monitor for emissions, which would be very costly.
There are a few typos:
P, 10 #4 & #7 are extra
p. 46 section5, sb section 5
The word isle is used instead of aisle throughout the document
Thank you,
Pam
236
1
CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: Three-story, 24-unit Windhover Terrace Apartments
(County File #CDDP21-03031)
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:
Everett Louie, Project Planner
(925) 655-2873
4. Project Location: North of Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd. Intersection
Martinez, CA 94553
Assessor Parcel No. 380-220-066
5. Project Sponsor's Name and
Address:
West Coast Land and Development, Inc – Pamela West
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
6. General Plan Designation: Multiple-Family Residential-High Density (MH)
7. Zoning: Multiple-Family Residential (M-29)
8. Description of Project: The applicant is requesting approval of a of a Development Plan to construct
an approximately 22,247-square-foot in size, 24-unit apartment building on a vacant property. The
project includes two units for low-income households and one unit for very low-income households and
a request for a Density Bonus of two units for a total of 24 units.
The project consists of the following elements:
• Parking related improvements for 34 parking spaces with two ADA accessible spaces and four
electric vehicle charging spaces;
• Asphalt and permeable pavement;
• Landscaping would include 25 trees and numerous shrubs throughout the property for a total
of 6,600 square feet of landscaping. A new six-foot fence along the rear property line and a
six-foot decorative wall along the side property lines;
• Retaining walls along the rear of the property;
• Fire Hydrant;
• Six long-term bicycle storage lockers and two short-term bicycle storage spaces;
• A 13’-7” tall carport that will cover 16 spaces located on the east side of the parcel;
• A 8’-8”, Approx. 261 square foot trash enclosure structure;
• Four downward-oriented LED streetlight-style light to be located near the carport to provide
site security;
• Bioretention Facilities;
• Site preparation would include approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803 cubic yards
of fill for bioretention treatment facilities and to direct stormwater to off-site drainage
infrastructure;
237
2
• Curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements and driveway ramp would be constructed along the
project frontage on Windover Way;
• The project includes approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803 cubic yards of fill.
The project requests a Tree permit for the following:
• The removal of four code protected trees work within the dripline of three code protected trees.
The project requests the following variances:
• A 38-6” height (where 30’ is the maximum allowed);
• A 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required);
The project requests the following concessions and reduction in development standards:
• A density bonus concession to reduce the Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking
ratios;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(e) for reduced
parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces;
The project requests an exception:
• An exception to Division 914, Collect and Convey requirements.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Surrounding Area: This area along Windhover Way is exclusively occupied by residential development.
The adjacent parcels to the north and south host single family residences. To the east of the site is a 13-
unit townhouse development. The two properties to the west both host duplexes. Approximately 316
feet northeast is a 12-unit apartment complex. Beyond the immediate neighborhood, along Pacheco
Boulevard there are a variety of residential, commercial, and retail uses including multi-family housing,
restaurants, schools, storage locations, gas stations, auto repair shops, and other retail services. Parcels
within the City of Martinez jurisdiction are located approximately 1,100 feet to the east of the subject
parcel.
Subject Property: The subject lot is approximately 0.75-acres in size (approximately 32,820 square feet)
rectangular shaped parcel (with the addition of a 52’ x 70’ strip which extends to the west and connects
the parcel to Windhover Way as an access.) The parcel is located on the east side of Windhover Way,
approximately 125 feet north of the Pacheco Boulevard and Windhover Way intersection in the in the
Pacheco/Vine Hill area. The parcel is vacant and is largely covered with grass and dirt and has eight
trees located around the perimeter of the parcel. There is existing curb, sidewalk, streetlights, and
underground utilities along the frontage of Windhover Way. Public Works has reviewed the submittal
and has indicated that the applicant will not be required to perform further widening or frontage
improvements. The general topographic slope of the parcel trends downward from west to east. The
elevation starts at 40 feet above mean sea level at Windhover Way and slopes down to 31 feet above
mean sea level at the rear of the property. The site currently has access off of Windhover Way which
will continue to remain as the access point. The site contains eight trees consisting of London Plane,
Carolina Cherry Laurel, California Black Walnut, Glossy Privet, Olive and Siberian Elm.
238
3
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 Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa Fire Protection District
• Contra Costa County Health Services Department
• Contra Costa Water District
• Mt. View 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.?
A Notice of Opportunity to Request Consultation was sent on May 24, 2023, in accordance with section
21080.3.1 of the California Resources Code to the Wilton Rancheria and Confederated Villages of
Lisjan Nation, the two California Native American tribes that have requested notification of proposed
projects. Pursuant to section 21080.3.1(d), there is a 30-day time period for the Confederated Villages
of Lisjan and the Wilton Rancheria to either request or decline consultation in writing for this project.
Staff did not receive a request for consultation in response. Therefore, consultation with Native
American tribes has not occurred in relation to this project.
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Without mitigation, the environmental factors checked below would have been potentially affected by this
project. Upon incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the following pages it has been found that
the project will not result in any impacts to the environment.
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
239
4
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, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
_____________________________ ____________________
Everett Louie Date
Planner II
Contra Costa County
Department of Conservation & Development
Everett Louie 7/11/2023
240
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
5
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The Open Space Element of the County General Plan identifies
major scenic ridges and waterways within the County as shown in Figure 9-1. The project site
is located more than 3 miles to the east of the nearest scenic ridgeway. The subject property is
not located near a major scenic resource and will therefore have a less than significant adverse
effect on a scenic vista.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Figure 5-4 (Scenic Routes Plan) of the Contra Costa County
Transportation and Circulation Element identifies the roadways which form the Countywide
scenic routes plan. The project site is bounded by Pacheco Blvd to the south and Windhover
Way to the west. The nearest scenic highway is Highway 4 which is approximately 1.30 miles
to the south of the project site. Highway traffic is not visible from the site. Since the subject
property is not visible from a state scenic highway and is void of any structures (the project site
is vacant and covered in shrubs), the project would not substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The vacant property site is located within the Multiple-Family
Residential (M-29) zoning district. Generally speaking, the intent of the M-29 zoning district is
to provide for residential infill development at a density which is supportive of the surrounding
area. In general, the project has been designed pursuant to the guidelines for development
within the M-29 zoning district. The project has been designed to be compatible with the
existing residential development in the area, including orienting the main entrance towards the
Windhover Way frontage. Surrounding uses include single-family residences to the north and
south, a 13-unit townhouse development to the east and a 12-unit apartment complex to the
northeast. The project has been reviewed for compliance with the M-29 zoning district
241
DRAFT
6
standards, which included the review of the preliminary landscape design that has been
submitted with the application. The project proposes to enhance the scenic quality of the site,
turning it from a vacant lot with overgrown vegetation to an urban use with landscaping. The
final landscape plan must be reviewed by staff upon project approval and prior to applying for
building and/or grading permits. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable
zoning and/or other regulations governing scenic quality.
d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project site is located in an
urbanized area. However, the site itself is vacant and would introduce new lighting as part of
the project design. As required by the Off-Street Parking ordinance, the proposed project will
include the installation of four downward-oriented LED streetlight-style lights to be located
near the carport to illuminate the parking areas and to allow for safe circulation around the
subject property during times of low natural light. The applicant has submitted a preliminary
lighting plan that details the location and type of proposed exterior lighting. The lighting plan
indicates that the location of the lights will be minimally located near residences off-site.
Additionally, the potential for light spillover is limited due to the proposed landscaping which
includes trees, a new stone masonry fence and an existing wood fence. The following
mitigation measure shall ensure that all outdoor lighting is directed downward and positioned
away from adjacent properties and streets, reducing such impacts to a less than significant
level.
Potential Impact: Project lighting could spill off-site and result in a potentially significant
adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring properties.
Thus, the following mitigation measure would ensure such impacts from project lighting would
have a less than significant impact on nighttime views.
Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a
building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the
(CDD) for review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the
proposed light post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed
down and screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent
glare or excessive light spillover.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 9: Open Space Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30919/Ch9-Open-Space-
Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 5: Transportation and Circulation
Element,” 2005-2020.
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/30915/Ch5-Transportation-
and- Circulation-Element?bidId=
242
DRAFT
7
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES – 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 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?
SUMMARY:
a-e) No Impact: The project site is located within the Multiple-Family Residential (M-29) zoning
district. The parcel is within an “Urban and Built-Up Land” area as shown on the California
Department of Conservation’s Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2018 map. Neither the
subject property, nor those in the vicinity are zoned for agricultural use nor does the site contain
farmland designated “Prime”, “Unique”, or of “Statewide Importance”. The site is not under a
Williamson Act contract with the County. Additionally, the project site is not considered forest
land as defined by California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) or timberland as defined
by California Public Resources Code Section 4526. Development of a vacant lot that is not
being used for any agricultural use and turning it into a residential project would not involve
substantial changes to the existing urban environment. Furthermore, the project site is located
in an area of the County that is urbanized and contains uses which include residential,
commercial and mixed use. Therefore, the project will have no impact on agricultural or forest
resources, will not convert Prime Farmland, unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide
importance to a non-agricultural use, will not result in the conversion or loss of forest resources
and will not contribute indirectly to the conversion of adjacent farmland.
Sources of Information
• California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
243
DRAFT
8
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
3. AIR QUALITY – 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 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) Less Than Significant Impact: 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 and to protect
the climate through the reduction of criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases. The CEQA
Guidelines support lead agencies in analyzing air quality impacts. If, after analysis, the
project’s air quality impacts are found to be below the significant thresholds, then the air
quality impacts may be considered less than significant. The potential air quality impacts for
this project were evaluated using the BAAQMD 2017 CEQA guidelines screening criteria.
Pursuant to these guidelines, if a project does not exceed the screening criteria size it is
expected to result in less than significant impacts to air quality.
The operational criteria pollutant screening size for the land use type “Apartment, low-rise” is
240 dwelling units, and the construction-related screening size is 78 dwelling units. The
proposed 24 dwelling unit apartment complex is below the residential screening criteria for the
low-rise apartment complex for both operational (i.e., occupancy of the residential units) and
construction-related pollutants. Furthermore, the screening criteria developed by BAAQMD
generally represent new developments on greenfield sites. The proposed project is proximate to
regional transit service and is considered an infill project in the otherwise developed,
surrounding area of Martinez.
The County’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) is designed to reduce local greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions while improving community health consistency with the BAAQMD’s guidance on
preparing a qualified GHG reduction strategy and State assembly Bill (AB) 32 GHG reduction
targets. To assist staff and developers with implementation of the GHG reduction strategy, the
CAP includes a development checklist (Appendix E) with strategies for project consistency
with the CAP. Such strategies include the installation of high-efficiency appliances, insulation,
244
DRAFT
9
electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and locating new development within one half mile of a
BART, Amtrak, or bus station. Staff will recommend conditions of approval to require
verification by staff of the County Building Inspection (BID) and Community Development
Division (CDD) of the project’s compliance with Appendix E standards prior to issuance of
building permits. Therefore, the potential for the project to conflict with or obstruct
implementation of BAAQMD’s Clean Air plan or the County’s Climate Action Plan is less than
significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed above, the proposed 24-unit apartment complex is
less than the criteria pollutant screening size determined by the BAAQMD, and thus would not
result in significant emissions of criteria air pollutants during the construction period or during
project operation. In addition, by implementing the strategies of the County CAP to reduce
GHG emissions, the proposed project would not cause a violation of any air quality standard
and would not contribute substantially to any existing or projected air quality violation.
Although the proposed project would contribute incrementally to the level of criteria air
pollutants in the atmosphere, the project would have a less than significant impact on the level
of any criteria pollutant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project is not expected to
cause any localized emissions that could expose sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences,
schools) to unhealthy long-term air pollutant levels. Construction activities, however, would
result in localized emissions of dust and diesel exhaust that could result in temporary impacts to
nearby residences, schools, and businesses.
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 is required to implement the
following mitigation measures, which the BAAQMD recommends to reduce construction dust
and exhaust impacts to a less than significant impact.
Potential Impact: Future grading and construction activities on the project site would result in
localized emissions of dust, diesel exhaust, and combustion emissions that could result in
potential, if temporary, air quality impacts to sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences,
schools) from the project site during project construction.
Mitigation Measure Air Quality 1: The following mitigations shall be included on all
construction plans and implemented throughout the construction phase of the project:
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.
245
DRAFT
10
3. 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.
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 5 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. The property owner or site contractor shall 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.
9. Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-
inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
10. All contractors shall use equipment that meets the California Air Resources Board' s
(CARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.
Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce the impact on the sensitive receptors
during project construction to a less than significant level.
d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The BAAQMD’s 2017 CEQA
guidelines indicate that odor impacts can occur from two different situations: 1) siting a new
odor source, or 2) siting a new sensitive receptor (e.g., residents). Although not absolute,
screening level distances between sources and receptors are utilized by BAAQMD to identify
potentially significant impacts from malodors. Depending on the type of land use, the identified
screening distance is between one and two miles as shown on Table 3-3 of the CEQA
Guidelines. These distances are to be used in conjunction with available complaint history. For
example, any odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year, averaged over three
years, is considered to have a significant impact on receptors within the applicable screening
distance. Examples of land uses which may potentially generate significant odors include
wastewater treatment plants, landfills/composting stations, refineries, chemical plants, etc.
The project is not expected to result in other emissions, such as objectionable odors, that would
adversely affect a substantial number of people (objectionable odors are typically associated
with agricultural or heavy industrial land uses such as refineries, chemical plants, landfills,
sewage-treatment plants, etc.) during project operation. However, during construction and
grading, diesel powered vehicles and equipment used on site could create localized odors.
These odors would be temporary, but 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.
246
DRAFT
11
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 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2017.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District. “Spare the Air, Cool the Climate Final,
2017 Clean Air.” Adopted 19 April 2017.
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/plans/2017-clean-air-
plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en.
• Contra Costa County. “Climate Action Plan.” Adopted by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors on 15 December 2015.
http://www.co.contracosta.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/39791/Contra-Costa-County-
Climate-Action-Plan?bidId=.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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?
247
DRAFT
12
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The Conservation Element, Figure 8-1 indicates that the project
site is not located in a significant ecological area and according to the California Fish and
Wildlife Public Access Lands Map, the project site is not indicated to include an area of
wildlife or ecological reserve. The location of the project site is surrounded by commercial and
residential development and the site currently is vacant with weeds. The site lacks suitable
habitat (there are no creeks, wetlands, or riparian habitats located on the subject parcel.
Therefore, there will be a less than significant impact on any special status species.
b) No Impact: According to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Public
Access Lands map, the project site is not located in or adjacent to an area identified as a
wildlife or ecological reserve by the CDFW. According to the Significant Ecological Areas and
Selected Locations of Protected Wildlife and Plant Species Areas map (Figure 8-1) of the
County General Plan, the project site is not located in or adjacent to a significant ecological
resource area. In addition, the property contains no perennial or intermittent streams, creeks or
other riparian habitat – Vine Hill Creek is located approximately 900 feet southeast of the
subject property. Therefore, 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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
c) No Impact: Wetlands are defined and identified under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as
“areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Wetlands Inventory map, no wetlands are located at or adjacent to the project site.
Therefore, no substantial adverse effects on federally protected wetlands are expected to occur
as a result of this project.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site does not contain any creeks, wetlands, or
riparian habitats located on the subject parcel. It is also not identified in Figure 8-1 of the
Conservation Element as an area of significant ecological area or locations of protected wildlife
and plant species. As previously mentioned, the project site is a vacant lot surrounded by
multiple residential properties and commercial properties. The surrounding area has been
disturbed and developed. Therefore, the proposed development is expected to have a less than
significant impact on 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
nursery sites, based on existing site conditions and the surrounding land uses.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site has several trees that are located within the
parcel boundaries. Because the lot is vacant, the trees are currently protected per Chapter 816-6,
248
DRAFT
13
Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance. The project would remove four code protected
trees and work within the dripline of three code protected trees for the construction of the 24-
unit apartment building and other various improvements. The applicant is applying for a tree
permit which is required prior to any work within the dripline of a code protected tree. The
applicant will be required to comply with the conditions of approval which require a tree
restitution bond and tree replanting plan. Therefore, as conditioned, the project will have a less
than significant impact to tree resources in the County does not conflict with tree preservation
policies for Contra Costa County.
f) No Impact: The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community
Conservation Plan (ECCC HCP/NCCP) was adopted by the County in October of 2006. The
purpose of this plan is to provide a framework to protect natural resources while streamlining
the environmental permitting process for impacts to covered special status species within the
rapidly expanding region of Eastern Contra Costa. The proposed project site is located outside
of the HCP/NCCP urban development area and thus HCP ordinance no. 2007-53 does not apply
to the project. Thus, the project would not conflict with any conservation plan.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 8: Conservation Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30918/Ch8-Conservation-
Element?bidId=
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife Lands. Public Access Lands Map.
Accessed May 28,2021. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/lands/
• Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Division 816 – Trees.
https://library.municode.com/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code?nodeId=T
IT8ZO_DIV816TR
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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:
a-c) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: The Vacant parcel is not a
historical resource pursuant to Section 15065.5 of the CEQA Guidelines because:
249
DRAFT
14
1. It is not a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical
Resources Commission, for listening in the California Register of Historical
Resources;
2. It is not a resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in
section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in a
historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public
Resources Code; and
3. Has not been determined to be historically or culturally significant by a lead agency.
In addition, the California Historical Resource Information System, Northwest Information
Center (NWIC) has reviewed the project and determined that there is low possibility for the
occurrence of unrecorded archeological resources at the site. Thus, no further study of
archeological resources is recommended at this time. Additionally, figure 9-2 of the Open
Space Element of the General Plan designates the site as “largely urbanized”, which generally
means that there is a low probability for encountering archeological resources. The project site
is vacant and as such, there are no existing buildings that would be more than 45 years old. The
project consists of the construction of an apartment building. The construction work could
include trenching, grading and other subsurface work. The proposed project was reviewed by
the NWIC, Wilton Rancheria Cultural Preservation Department and Confederated Villages of
Lisjan Nation who did not provide any comments of concern. While the project was reviewed
by the NWIC and Tribes in the area, there is nevertheless a potential for previously unknown
cultural resources to be uncovered during the construction phase of the project.
Potential Impact: Although there is no evidence that there is any specific cultural resources
known in in the project area, there is nevertheless a potential for previously unknown cultural
resources to be uncovered during construction activities requiring excavation or earth
movement.
The following mitigation measure will ensure that in the event cultural resources are
discovered, the proper actions are taken to reduce the adverse environmental impacts to cultural
resources to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 1: The following measures shall be implemented during project-
related ground disturbance and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp
approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever
occurs first, the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed
below are included on the construction plans.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading, or
trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if they observe
any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural resource discovery (e.g., wood,
stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies; deposits of
wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are
encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery
shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and, if
250
DRAFT
15
necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the County and
other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be mitigated.
Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be prepared
documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report should be submitted to
the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected
and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an archaeologist shall be
contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of a Native American origin, the
Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this
identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely
Descendant (MLD) to inspect the property and provide recommendations for the proper
treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist should prepare a
report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for the treatment
of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in
coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report should be submitted to the
Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 9: Open Space Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30919/Ch9-Open-Space-
Element?bidId=
• California Department of Conservation. California Historical Resources.
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=7
• Contra Costa County Historic Resources Inventory (2019) - https://www.contracosta
.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1116/Historic-Resources-Inventory-HRI?bidId
• California Historical Resources Information System Letter Dated November 22, 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
251
DRAFT
16
a) Less Than Significant Impact: In December 2015, a Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted
by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in order to identify and achieve a reduction in
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by the year 2020 as mandated by the State under AB32. The
design and operation strategies set forth in the CAP for reducing GHG emissions include
measures such as installing energy efficient appliances that would also reduce the project’s
consumption of energy resources during operation. The residential project will be required to
comply with all California Code Title 24 (CalGreen) building energy efficiency standards for
an apartment residential building that are in effect at the time that building permit applications
are submitted, including any standards regarding the provision of solar energy. If approved, the
project will be reviewed under all current energy standards as part of the plan check process.
During the plan check process, the proposed development would be subject to the 2022
California Building Standards Code which would include compliance with the energy
conservation standards in the Energy Code Section and CalGreen Code Section of the 2022
California Building Standards Code. In addition, the project must also comply with the
County’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, which promotes efficient water use.
Compliance with all applicable regulations will ensure this development will not have a
significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy. During construction, the project may require temporary electrical power. The General
Contractor would be required to apply for a temporary power permit from the County and to
comply with all applicable building standards for a temporary power connection. Therefore, the
impact of construction or operation on electrical energy resources is anticipated to be less than
significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: As mentioned in subsection-a above, the residential project will
be required to comply with all California Code Title 24 (CalGreen) building energy efficiency
standards for an apartment residential building that are in effect at the time that building permit
applications are submitted, including any standards regarding the provision of solar energy. In
addition, the design and operation strategies set forth in Table E.1 Standards for CAP
Consistency – New Development (Appendix E of the County’s CAP) include measures such as
installing energy efficient appliances that would also reduce the project’s consumption of
energy resources. Therefore, the project will not conflict with a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency.
Sources of Information
• California Air Resources Board, Assembly Bill 32 Overview
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm
• California Energy Commission 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2022standards/
• Climate Action Plan, Contra Costa County, 2015
252
DRAFT
17
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) i) Less Than Significant Impact: The California Division of Mines and Geology’s Special
Publication 42 indicates that the State Geologist is required to delineate “Earthquake Fault
Zones” (EFZs) along known active faults in California. The project site is not mapped within
an EFZ, nor within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. The nearest fault considered active
by the CGS is the Concord fault, which passes more than 10.000 feet east of the site. Because
the site is not within an official Earthquake Fault Zone, the risk of fault rupture is generally
regarded as very low.
ii) Less Than Significant Impact: The U.S. Geological Survey (2016) indicates that there is a 72
percent chance of at least one magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake striking the San Francisco
Bay region between 2014 and 2043. With that, the County General Plan Safety Element
253
DRAFT
18
identifies areas that are more or less susceptible to seismic damage as shown in Figure 10-4
Estimated seismic Ground Response. According to Figure 10-4 of the Safety Element, the
property is located on Hard Bedrock which has the lowest damage susceptibility. The risk of
structural damage from ground shaking is regulated by the building code and the County
Grading Ordinance. Codes are intended to keep earthquake risks to an acceptable minimum,
and they assume that the ground is stable. Ground failure can result in greater damage.
Nevertheless, compliance with the operative provisions of the California Building Code (CBC)
along with (i) compliance with the County Grading Ordinance (ii) conservative design and (iii)
quality construction are the best means of controlling the life loss and damage potential of
earthquakes. Current CBC (2022) requires the use of seismic parameters in the design of all
structures requiring building permits. These parameters are based on soil profile types and
proximity of faults deemed capable of generating strong/violent earthquake shaking. Design
level geotechnical reports routinely provide CBC seismic design parameters, and upon
implementation of the mitigations below, adverse effects due to strong seismic ground shaking
would be reduced to a less than significant level.
iii) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The Safety Element (Figure
10-5 Estimated Liquefaction Potential) of the County General Plan divides lands within the
County into three liquefaction potential categories: generally high, generally moderate to low,
and generally low. It is used as a “screening criteria” during the processing of land development
applications, on a project-by-project basis. By intent, the map is conservative on the side of
safety. The project site is entirely or chiefly in an area classified as generally high liquefaction
potential. As a result, the project applicant submitted a Geology study that was peer reviewed
by the County geologist, Darwin Myers Associate (DMA). The Geology report prepared by
GEC Consultants confirmed that the soils are known to be expansive and corrosive and
identified undocumented fill on site as an issue of drainage.
The County Peer Review Geologist (DMA) reviewed the report by GEC Consultants and
concluded that the report of GEC Consultants sufficient to define the geotechnical hazards and
to identify mitigation measures. DMA recommends that an updated report be provided prior to
issuance of grading or building permits. The focus of the updated report shall be to address the
following potential hazards, expansive soils, corrosive soils, siting and design of any required
bio-retention facilities and/or other measures that may be recommended to achieve compliance
with the clean water requirements of the RWQCB, possible presence of existing undocumented
fills and provide seismic parameters based on the California Building Code. Thus, the applicant
is required to implement the following mitigation measures:
Potential Impact: The project site is within an area where soils are known to be expansive and
may be corrosive. Additionally, the geotechnical report prepared by GEC Consultants identified
the presence of undocumented fill on the site. Accordingly, staff recommends that the
following mitigation measures be incorporated as part of the project to reduce the potential
hazards resulting from corrosive soils and other onsite conditions to a less than significant
level.
254
DRAFT
19
Mitigation Measure Geology 1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a
building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall
submit a geotechnical report update with the geotechnical review fee in the amount of $3,000,
referencing the proposed grading, drainage and foundation plans and providing specific criteria
and standards for site grading, drainage and foundation design based on adequate subsurface
data, laboratory testing of samples and engineering analysis. The scope of the geotechnical
investigation shall address the following potential hazards: (i) expansive soils, (ii) corrosive
soils, (iii) siting and design of any required bio-retention facilities and/or other measures that
may be recommended to achieve compliance with the clean water requirements of the
RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing undocumented fills and effective measures to
control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v) provide seismic parameters based on the adopted
California Building Code at the time that a residential building permit is requested.
Mitigation Measure Geology 2: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a
building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the geotechnical report
update required by Geology 1, above, shall be subject to review by the County’s peer review
geologist, and review/approval of the CDD. Improvement, grading and building plans shall
carry out the recommendations of the approved report.
iv) Less Than Significant Impact: In 1975, the USGS issued photo-interpretation maps of
landslides and other surficial deposits in Contra Costa County (that mapping is presented on
Page 10-6 in the Safety Element of the County’s General Plan). According to this map, which
was prepared by an experienced USGS geologist, the project site is in an area that is not known
to have landslides. The County GIS Accela tool also does not identify the site as an area with
the possibility of having a landslide. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a less than
significant impact for potential of landslides for this site.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Any areas that are disturbed during construction of the project
would be covered by the proposed improvements or landscaping. Since all areas of the property
that will be disturbed will be covered by new structures, pervious and impervious surfaces, or
landscaping, the potential for soil erosion or loss of topsoil is less than significant. Additionally,
a routine provision for grading permits in Contra Costa County is a requirement for submittal of
an erosion control plan. This plan is subject to technical review by inspectors of the County
Grading Section. Normally there are refinements to erosion control plans as the winter rainy
season approaches. Additional details are included in the refined erosion control plan, including
such items as provisions for (a) storage of extra erosion control materials on site and (b)
monitoring of the performance of disturbed areas on the site during/immediately following
significant rainstorms. If erosion control facilities are damaged or failing to perform as
intended, the erosion control measures being implemented on the site are refined to correct the
deficiency. Implementation of an erosion control plan would further ensure that the project
results in less than significant impacts due to erosion or the loss of topsoil.
c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The geotechnical report prepared
by GEC Consultants confirmed that the project site is within an area where the soils are known
to be expansive and may be corrosive. Additionally, the report confirmed the presence of
255
DRAFT
20
undocumented fill on the site and they identified drainage as a concern. GEC recommended
that the drainage should be carefully controlled in the vicinity of the proposed structures and
that the undocumented fill must be over-excavated and either (i) incorporated into engineered
fill or (ii) if the existing fill contains materials unsuitable for use in an engineered fill, that fill
material shall be removed from the site and taken to a suitable facility for disposal. The
County’s Peer Review Geologist is concerned that the report was not adequate for the issuance
of construction permits without a report update.
Potential Impact: The project contains soils that are known to be expansive and may be
corrosive. With the addition of undocumented fill, there is potentially significant impact for the
project to be located on unstable soil that is not suitable for supporting the proposed
improvements. Accordingly, staff recommends that mitigation measures be incorporated as part
of the project to reduce the potential hazards resulting from undocumented fill and to perform
corrosion potential testing of the graded building pad.
Mitigation Measure Geology 3: Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of
foundation-related work) the project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential
testing of the graded building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid
damage to improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel).
Mitigation Measure Geology 4: The geotechnical report required by Geology 1 routinely
includes recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction.
These services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer
to (i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed conditions
during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the basis of the design
recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the opportunity for field
modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID approval), based on exposed
conditions. The monitoring shall commence during clearing, and extend through grading,
including testing services during placement of engineered fill, installation of recommended
drainage facilities, and foundation related work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final”
grading inspection, pending submittal of a report from the project geotechnical engineer that
documents their observation and testing services during grading, installation of drainage
improvements.
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the apartment
building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer documenting the
monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-related geotechnical
recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier hole drilling/ foundation
preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g. collection of roof gutter runoff in
a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable discharge point; and possibly installation of a
subdrain system around the perimeter of the foundation to control moisture beneath the
foundation).
256
DRAFT
21
d) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The soil series that occurs at the
site is known to be expansive and may be corrosive. Expansive soils expand when water is
added and shrink when they dry out. This continuous change in soil volume can cause
structures to move unevenly and crack. Corrosive soils tend to damage concrete and/or
uncoated steel that is in contact with the ground. Geotechnical design criteria are needed to
avoid/ minimize damage from these adverse soil conditions. A first step is to test the soils to
confirm / modify the Soil Survey’s preliminary assessment. In the case of corrosion potential,
the soil testing can determine if the soils are corrosive to either steel; or concrete; or to both
steel and concrete. The results of that testing can serve to alert the developer and their
development consultants (e.g., underground contractor, foundation contractor) of this hazard.
The underground contactors can either consider the testing performed to be adequate and act on
the results of testing; or they can perform supplemental testing to provide a more complete
assessment of this hazard.
Potential Impact: As discussed in Section 6(a)(iii) above, the available information indicates a
significant risk of damage to structures / improvements due to these adverse soil conditions.
Consequently, the applicant is required to implement the following mitigation measure.
Mitigation Measure Geology 5: All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during
the dry season (April 15 through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be
revegetated to minimize erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion
control work shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved
by the Building Inspection Division.
e) No Impact: The subject property is within an area served by the Mt. View Sanitary District.
The proposed development will be connected to the existing public sewer service. The Sanitary
District has reviewed the project and has indicated that they would review the sewer
improvement plans. There will be no septic system within the project.
f) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: There are no known
paleontological resources located at the project site nor have any unique geological features
been identified. Nevertheless, there is always the potential for ground disturbing activity to
reveal previously undocumented features. Implementing the mitigation below ensures the
project will not significantly impact any such resource that may be uncovered by construction
activity at the project site.
Potential Impact: Ground disturbance during the project’s construction phase has the potential
for disturbing previously unknown unique paleontological resources. In addition to the
mitigation measures for Cultural Resources, the following mitigation measures will ensure that
in the event unique paleontological resources are discovered, the proper actions are taken to
reduce the adverse environmental impacts to unique paleontological resources to a less than
significant level.
Mitigation Measure Geology 6: Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during
grading, trenching, or other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials
shall be stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
257
DRAFT
22
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and, if
deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s).
Sources of Information
• California Building Code, 2022.
• California Division of Mines and Geology - Special Publication 42.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/Special-
Publications/SP_042.pdf
• California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Map.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 10: Safety Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30920/Ch10-Safety-
Element?bidId=
• United States Geologic Survey. Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region
2014-2043. August, 2016. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf
• United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Web Soil Survey Map.
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
• Darwin Myers Associates. “Geologic Peer Review – CDDP21-0303,” Dated November
19. 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed in the Air Quality section of this study, the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) adopted the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan
that, in addition to various criteria air pollutants, addresses GHG emissions at a regional scale.
The project includes a new 24-unit apartment building. The screening criteria are not thresholds
of significance but were developed to provide a conservative indication of whether a proposed
project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts. Pursuant to these guidelines,
the potential for apartment style buildings would be 78 low-rise apartment dwellings. The
project is much lower than the threshold as it proposes 24-units. While the project would
generate some GHG emissions, the project’s global climate change is less than “cumulatively
considerable’ because the project does not exceed applicable screening criteria, as described
258
DRAFT
23
above. Thus, it can be assumed that the project will have a less than significant impact on the
environment regarding greenhouse gas emissions.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Within the 2017 Clean Air Plan is an ambitious GHG reduction
target to reduce Bay Area GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050. The
2017 control strategy includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors –
reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) – and reduce transport of ozone and
its precursors to neighboring air basins. In addition, the plan builds upon and enhances
BAAQMD’s efforts to reduce emissions of fine particulate matter and toxic air contaminants.
BAAQMD’s approach to developing a threshold of significance for GHG emissions is to
identify emissions level for which a project would not be expected to substantially conflict with
existing California legislation adopted to reduce statewide GHG emissions. For land use
development projects, the threshold is 1,100 metric tons per year (MT/yr) of CO2e. If a project
would generate GHG levels above the threshold, it would be considered to contribute
substantially to a cumulative impact and would be considered significant. The emissions
generated as a result of the operational activities of the proposed 24-unit apartment complex
will be far less than the significance threshold and will not result in significant levels of GHG
that will conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation pertaining to the reduction of
GHG. There may be some increase in greenhouse gases as a result of the project, but they
would be considered less than significant due to the temporary nature of the construction phase
of the project as the project will be required to incorporate energy efficiency measures from the
current Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Code and comply with the CalGreen /
Construction & Demolition (C&D) Debris Recovery Program.
Sources of Information
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2017.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
• Contra Costa County. “Climate Action Plan.” Adopted by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors on 15 December 2015. http://www.co.contracosta.
ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/39791/Contra-Costa-County-Climate-Action- lan?bidId=.
259
DRAFT
24
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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-b) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project consists of constructing a new 24-unit
apartment complex. The proposed improvements and overall project site will be utilized for
residential-related improvements and activities. Although small quantities of commercially
available hazardous materials may be used for household or common-area cleaning or for
landscape maintenance, these materials would not be used in sufficient quantities to pose a
threat to human or environmental health.
The use of fuels and lubricants, paints, and other construction materials would occur during the
construction phase of the project. However, 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 result in a less than significant impact
from construction activities.
260
DRAFT
25
Therefore, the potential for impacts associated with handling, storing, and dispensing of
hazardous materials, or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving
the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment from project construction or
operation would be less than significant.
Staff utilized EnviroStor from the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s data system and
the tracking system determined that the site is not a site of hazardous waste. No evidence
reviewed by staff suggests that the project would be located on a site with hazardous materials
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, a less than significant impact is
expected.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The Las Juntas Elementary School is located approximately 970
feet east while Morello Park Elementary School is located approximately 2684 feet south of the
project site. However, due to the proposed use of the building (24-unit apartment), impacts on
either school from hazardous substances emitting from the project site, post construction,
would be less than significant. No evidence reviewed by staff suggests that the project would
include foreseeable conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the
environment. The use of construction-related fuels and lubricants, paints, and other
construction materials, during the construction period, would occur in accordance with
applicable federal, state, and local laws, including California Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (Cal/OSHA) requirements. Therefore, the potential impacts from the project to
emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste, is considered to be less than significant.
d) No Impact: The California Environmental Protection Agency maintains an updated list of
Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites (Cortese List). The subject property is not listed on the
Cortese List and is not categorized as a hazardous materials site. Therefore, the project will
have no impact in this respect.
e) No Impact: The project is not located within the vicinity of any public airport or public use
airport and will not conflict with an airport land use plan. The nearest airport facility to the
project site is the Buchanan Field airport, which is approximately 2 miles southeast of the
project site. Thus, the proposed project would not present any safety hazard to airports or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.
f) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject site fronts Windhover Way, which connects to
Pacheco Boulevard, both are County maintained roads. Windhover Way along the project
frontage is approximately 36-foot-wide street within a 56-foot right-of-way. There are existing
curbs, sidewalk, streetlights, and underground utilities along the frontage. No further widening
or frontage improvements are necessary with this development. The project will build a
driveway that will connect to Windhover Way from the interior parking lot. The proposed
project will not impact any existing communication/utility structures such as power poles or
telecommunications towers which may be necessary for an existing emergency response or
evacuation plan. Although project construction would primarily occur onsite, the required water
main extensions may require temporary road closures or reduced lanes. Additionally, in the
event that the alternative drainage plan would be necessary, extension of a new storm drain
261
DRAFT
26
pipe may require temporary or partial road closures. The nature and duration of those road
closures would be subject to review by the County Public Works Department for compliance
with applicable transportation regulations and require issuance of an encroachment permit.
It should also be noted that the project was referred to the Contra Costa County Fire Protection
District requesting comments. In a returned letter dated November 15, 2021, the Fire Protection
District is requiring the applicant submit construction plans for review. All construction plans
will be subject to the review of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District for consistency
with applicable Fire Code that is in effect at the time when the application for a building permit
is submitted. Therefore, the routing review of construction plans will ensure that final
construction plans will not result in a condition with inadequate emergency vehicle access.
Accordingly, the project would have a less than significant impact on emergency response and
emergency evacuation plans.
g) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is characterized as “urban unzoned” on the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map for
local responsibility areas and thus, would not be considered to have a high hazard risk due to
wildfires. The nearest High Fire Zone in Local Responsibility Area is over 2,000 feet north of
the project site while the nearest High Fire Zone in State Responsibility Area is over 2 miles
west. The project site is in a developed area within the service area of the Contra Costa County
Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). Development projects are generally referred to the Fire
District for review and comment to ensure that the proposal does not conflict with applicable
fire codes. There was no indication from the CCCFPD review of the project that the proposed
development poses a significant fire risk. Based on their review, the project proponent will be
required to provide construction plans to the fire district for review and approval. The plans
shall meet the 2022 California Building Code, 2022 California Residential Code and the
applicable California Fire Code. Therefore, there is a less than significant impact of indirect
risk of exposing people to loss, injury, or death involving wildland fire.
Sources of Information
• California Department of Public Health FAQs About Asbestos in the Home and
Workplace, 2017.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/CDPH%20Docume
nt%20Library/AsbestosFactSheet_201711_final-ADA.pdf
• California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor. Hazardous Waste and
Substances Site List. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp
• California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment
Program. Contra Costa County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA, 2009.
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf
• California Building Standards Commission. “2022 California Fire Code, California
Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9.” Accessed in 2023.
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAFC2022P1/california-code-of-regulations-title-24.
• California State Geoportal. “California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer.” Accessed
in 202. https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414.
262
DRAFT
27
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “CCCFPD Project No.:P-2021-05611.”
Dated November 15, 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 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?
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed development is residential in nature, and will
not consist of any manufacturing, processing, industrial, or other commercial activities
which would generate by-products or waste that would pose a significant risk for impacting
water quality or waste discharge requirements within the County. The project site is located
within the service of the MT. View Sanitary District service area and will have access to
public sewage disposal services. A Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) is required for
applications that will create and/or redevelop impervious surface area exceeding 10,000
square feet (5,000 square feet for projects that include parking lots, restaurants, automotive
service facilities and gas stations), 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
263
DRAFT
28
(NPDES) Permit. The proposed development is residential in nature, and will not consist of
any manufacturing, processing, industrial, or other commercial activities which would
generate by-products or waste that would pose a significant risk for impacting water quality
or waste discharge requirements within the County. The project includes approximately
23,790 square feet of impervious surface (including the building and parking area), which
is above the threshold for requiring submittal of a SWCP. The applicant submitted a
preliminary Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) for the proposed stormwater management
facilities and controls as required by the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge
Control Ordinance. The SWCP submitted by the applicant has been deemed “preliminarily
complete” by the County’s Public Works Department for the purposes of this phase of
project review. Subsequent revisions and a final SWCP will be required as the project
proceeds through the design and construction process.
The project is not expected to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality because
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, long-term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water
Program for the site's stormwater drainage.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is within the Contra Costa Water District
(CCWD) service area. Since the project proposes to utilize a public water supply, no
groundwater wells would be required. Pursuant to a letter from CCWD, the proposed
development will require a fire service, a domestic service and an irrigation service for the
landscaping. CCWD recommended that the applicant submit plans to the water district for
review and approval. The project also plans to install up to four bioretention areas that would
help facilitate groundwater recharge and help offset the increased impervious surface area on
the project site. Therefore, there is less than significant potential for the project to substantially
decrease groundwater supplies, interfere with groundwater recharge, or impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin.
c)
i, ii, iii
Less Than Significant Impact: 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. A preliminary stormwater
control plan was prepared by CALICHI Design Group which indicated that the storm drain
improvements for this development would direct drainage to the frontage of Windhover Way.
The applicant will construct retaining walls along the east and south property lines to eliminate
264
DRAFT
29
the current surface discharge of water to adjacent properties. The Contra Costa County Public
Works Department has reviewed the drainage pattern at 98 Windhover Way and found no
evidence that the property currently drains onto the vacant parcel at APN 380-220-066. The
County elevation date contours imply that stormwater should natural drain southeast from 98
Winhover Way, avoiding the proposed project parcel.
Additionally, the site proposed drainage upgrades to prevent any off-site drainage. The property
slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner, away and considerably below street
grade. The applicant proposes to install a bioretention facility onsite which discharges to an
existing 18” storm drain in Windhover Way, effectively diverting the onsite flows. The
applicant has requested an exception to Division 914 of the County Ordinance per section 92-
6.002 of the County Ordinance Code. Further, analysis of the project by the Contra Costa
County Public Works Department determined that the applicant shall be permitted an exception
from the collect and convey requirements of the County Ordinance Code and will be allowed to
discharge to an existing storm drain provided that the applicant submit a drainage report to
verify the adequacy of the downstream drainage system. The applicant will be required to
submit a report verifying the adequacy of the stormwater facility or natural watercourse to
which the stormwater shall be directed (and to ensure that the system is adequate).
d) No Impact: Seiche, tsunami, and mudflow events are generally associated with large bodies or
large flows of water. The project site is not located within a 100-year or 500-year flood plain as
designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map.
According to the Safety Element of the County General Plan, the project site is not located in a
hazard zone for mudflows. A seiche is a water wave in a standing body of water such as a large
lake or reservoir that is caused by an earthquake, a major landslide, or strong winds. This
hazard does not exist within the Martinez area as there are no large lakes or reservoirs in the
area. As such, there would be no risk of pollutants being released from the site due to
inundation through flooding, tsunamis, mudflows, or seiche, therefore, there would be no
impact in this regard.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not expected to violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality because 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, long term BMPs in accordance with the Contra Costa Clean Water Program
for the site's stormwater drainage. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant
impact on the implementation of an adopted water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa Clean Water Program, C3 Guidance: Development,
https://www.cccleanwater.org/construction-business/development
265
DRAFT
30
• Contra Costa County Public Works CDP21-03031 Staff Report & Recommended
Conditions of Approval dated December 19, 2022.
• Contra Costa County Tsunami Hazard Areas, California Department of Conservation,
2021. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/contra-costa
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Safety Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30920/Ch10-Safety-
Element?bidId=
• CALICHI DESIGN GROUP. “Stormwater Control Plan for DP21-3031).” Dated
February 15, 2022.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
SUMMARY:
a) No Impact: The subject property is currently vacant lot within a developed, urban area of the
Martinez area in unincorporated Contra Costa County. Existing land uses in the vicinity
primary consists of single-family residential development and related uses such as churches,
schools, convenience stores, apartment buildings and townhouses. The project site is
approximately 0.75 acres in area and is not large enough to constitute an independent
established “community” within its boundaries. Furthermore, the proposed project does not
consist of a new roadway, wall structure, or other improvements that would physically divide,
or impede or disrupt the manner in which people enter and exit the Martinez area and the
Windhover/Pacheco area in general. Due to the mixed-use zoning of the project vicinity, the
proposed development would not divide an established community.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The applicant is requesting approval of a of a Development Plan
to construct an approximately 22,247-square-foot in size, 24-unit apartment building, construct
a covered carport for 16 parking spaces, and to install of associated improvements (e.g.,
pavement, utilities, stormwater conveyance) on a vacant property. The project includes a Tree
Permit for the removal of four code protected trees within the dripline of three code protected
trees. The project includes two units for low-income households and one unit for very low-
income households and a request for a Density Bonus of two units for a total of 24 units.
Land Use Element
The project site is located within the Multiple-Family Residential High Density (MH) General
Plan Land Use designation. Generally speaking, the intent of the MH designation is to allow for
266
DRAFT
31
residential uses such as apartments, condominiums, town houses and auxiliary uses such as
churches.
The proposed project would construct a 24-unit apartment complex on a parcel intended for
High Density residential uses. The proposed apartment development will be residential in
nature, and as a result will be compatible with other residential uses that surround the site.
Within this designation, the General Plan allows for 22.0 to 29.9 multiple-family units per net
acre. Thus, as proposed the multi-family project is consistent with the Contra Costa County
General Plan development guidelines for the MH land use designation.
General Plan Policies for the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard Area
The project site is located within the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard area. As such, the following
general plan policies for this area are applicable to the project and the project is consistent with
these policies.
• Policy 3-105: The scenic assets and unstable slopes of the Vine Hill Ridge are to be protected
for open space/agricultural use.
The proposed project is not located on or near Vine Hill Ridge. Therefore, the project will not
impact the open space/agricultural use of that area.
• Policy 3-106: The residential neighborhood east of I-680 shall be buffered from the
industrial/landfill-related uses.
The project parcel is located west of I-680, therefore this policy does not apply to the project.
• Policy 3-107: Approximately 40 acres of land south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
tracks, between Morello and Pacheco, is designated Agricultural Lands, to encourage the
continued operation of the Viano family vineyards and winery.
The project parcel is not located within the land designated in the policy. The project parcel is
over 1,500 feet northeast of the Viano family vineyards and winery. Therefore, the project will
not conflict with this policy.
Housing Element
A component of preparing the County’s Housing Element for the General Plan is the
identification of vacant and underutilized suits suitable for residential development, and an
evaluation of the housing development potential of these sites in fulfilling the County’s share of
the regional housing needs as determined by the Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG).
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 Number 380-220-066 is not
among the parcels listed in the inventory of residential sites which were relied upon to meet the
267
DRAFT
32
County’s share of regional housing needs. Nevertheless, the project includes a total of 24
residential units. The project includes one-bedroom and two-bedroom units. These unit types
will increase housing opportunities for different size households for different income
categories. As previously stated, this project maximizes the housing density and development
of the site and includes a density bonus of nine percent above the base unit density for the site.
Therefore, the project will contribute towards the regional housing need for the County and
provide needed housing units for the region.
Zoning
The subject property is within the M-29 Multiple Family Residential (M-29) Zoning district.
County Code 84-26.402 – Uses – Permitted (3) states that Multiple family buildings, but not
including motels or hotels, is permitted use. Therefore, the proposed project is a permitted use
within the M-29 Zoning. With the included variances and concessions pursuant to Government
Code Section 65915(e), the application is consistent with the districts’ development standards
and the County Zoning Ordinance. The district’s zoning development standards dictate
allowable development in the area. The project would require two variances from these
standards, building height and reduced driveway aisle width and would utilize the Density
Bonus Request to request a concession to reduce the open space requirement and a reduction
for parking stall size, parking setback and total number of covered parking spaces.
The variance request for increased building height and parking aisle width would be consistent
with the intent of the zoning district and are necessary given the project site’s constraints. The
variance for building height is a result of the necessary lot padding that is required for drainage
to be directed to Windhover Way as the lot is lower by almost 6 feet at the rear of the property.
The added fill raises the height of the building from 34’ to 38’-6”. The reduced parking isle
widths allows for the project allow the project to have more parking spaces and an aisle for
vehicles to navigate. The reduction in parking aisle space allows for more maneuverability and
to accommodate additional parking spaces. With the project proposing to meet the minimum
landscape coverage, the driveway aisle space had to be reduced to accommodate this feature.
With just a small reduction in the driveway aisle width, the project can provide more parking
spaces and landscape area.
The project requests the following concessions, reduction in development standards, and
exception:
• A density bonus concession to reduce the Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking
ratios;
• A reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(e) for reduced
parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces;
• An exception to Division 914, Collect and Convey requirements.
268
DRAFT
33
The project is subject to Chapter 822-4, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, and the applicant
is required to constrict 3.3 inclusionary units. The applicant has submitted an Inclusionary
Housing Plan, which proposes to construct and rent three inclusionary units. Two units will be
available to “lower-income households,” and one will be available to a “very low-income
household.”
Although the project consists of requests for variances to allow for an increased maximum
height and driveway aisle width, reduction in development standards to allow for reduced
parking stall size, parking setbacks and total number of covered parking spaces, concessions to
reduce the Open Space requirement, and an exception to the collect and convey drainage
requirements the project substantially conforms to the design guidelines and General Plan
Policies for the Martinez area as well as other General Plan policies and goals for
unincorporated Contra Costa County. Therefore, the project has a less than significant potential
for conflicting with any applicable land use, policy, General Plan, Specific Plan, or zoning
ordinance adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Land Use Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County Municipal Code. Title 8. https://library.municode.com
/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code?nodeId=TIT8ZO
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a-b) No Impact: Pursuant to Figure 8-4 (Mineral Resource Areas) of the County General Plan
Conservation Element, the project site is not located within any area of the County identified as
a significant mineral resource area. No known mineral resources have been identified in the
project vicinity, and there is no reason to believe that they exist at the project site. Therefore,
the project would not 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 and would not impact any mineral
resource recovery site.
Sources of Information
269
DRAFT
34
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Conservation Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30918/Ch8-Conservation-
Element?bidId=
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
13. NOISE – Would the project:
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) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The subject property fronts
Windhover Way. The project site is within an area of Martinez that is generally used for mixed
use including residential, commercial and light industrial. Figure 11-5C of the Noise Element
of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020, identifies that the subject property is
within an area of the County where 2005 DNL and CNEL Noise levels range above 60 decibels
(dB). Although Contra Costa County’s threshold for residential uses is a DNL of 60dB as
shown on Figure 11-6 (Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments) of the
County General Plan’s Noise Element, the County requires new multiple-family residential
projects to have an interior standard of 45dBA DNL or less. To evaluate the noise levels of the
proposed project, a noise study was prepared by Michael Thill of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.
A noise monitoring survey was conducted to quantify the existing noise environment at the site
between Wednesday, April 27, 2022 and Friday, April 29, 2022. The noise monitoring survey
included two long-term noise measurements (LT-1 and LT-2) and three short-term noise
measurements (ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3), as showing in Figure 1. All noise measurements were
conducted with Larson Davis Laboratories Model LxT1 Sound Level Meters fitted with ½-inch
pre-polarized condenser microphones and windscreens. The meters were calibrated with a
Larson Davis Model CAL200 precision acoustic calibrator prior to and following the
measurement survey. The internal clocks of the sound level meters were synchronized to ensure
270
DRAFT
35
both identical sound level response and simultaneous operation. As shown in Figure 1 below,
noise level measurements were taken in five areas within the subject property to determine the
difference in noise levels. The surveys were conducted at elevated positions (e.g., 12 feet above
the existing grade) to simulate noise exposure levels at the ground floor and second floors of
the proposed apartment building.
According to the study, traffic along Pacheco Boulevard was the predominant noise source at
these locations. Table 3 summarizes the noise measurement results.
The future noise environment at the project site will continue to result primarily from vehicle
traffic along Pacheco Boulevard. An increase in traffic volumes along Pacheco Boulevard
would correlate to an increase in noise levels at the project site. The Martinez General Plan
Update forecasts a traffic noise level increase of 1 dBA Ldn along the adjacent segment of
Pacheco Boulevard by the year 2040, with the future Ldn projected to reach 71 dBA at 75 feet
from the roadway centerline.
271
DRAFT
36
Common outdoor us areas are proposed along the south and east boundaries of the site. Existing
noise levels measured in these areas ranged from 55 to 59 dBA Ldn. By 2040, the unmitigated
noise level would be expected to increase by 1 dBA Ldn and would range from 56 to 60 dBA
Ldn. The project also proposes the construction of a 6-foot masonry wall along the south
boundary of the site that would provide additional noise reduction. Therefore, future exterior
noise levels would be less than 60 dBA Ldn and within the “normally acceptable” noise and
land use compatibility range identified for residential land uses.
Potential Impact: As shown on Figure 11-5 O of the Noise Element, the subject property is
within an area of the County that is identified as having nose levels range above 60 decibels.
The introduction of a new residential apartment building could introduce new noise sources
including temporary noise from construction activities. There may be periods of time where
there would be loud noise generated from the construction equipment, vehicles, and tools that
would impact nearby residences and businesses. Additionally, outdoor-to-indoor noise may also
be present due to the location of the project in close proximity to residences and Pacheco
boulevard. Thus, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented.
Mitigation Measure Noise 1: All windows and doors shall have the minimum ratings STC 26
and mechanical ventilation installed for the building.
Mitigation Measure Noise 2: The following construction restrictions shall be implemented
during project construction and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp
approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the
applicant shall provide evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are included
on the face of the construction plans.
1. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to
adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all project-related
contractors. The applicant shall notify neighbors within 300 feet of the subject property at
least one week in advance of demolition, grading, and construction activities.
2. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random debris and
trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner. The project site must maintain and keep dust
down by watering the site by use of a water truck, water hose, street sweeping and other dust
control and maintenance measures.
3. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number and person
to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number to call in complaints shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
4. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion
engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-
generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences as
possible.
5. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion
engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
272
DRAFT
37
6. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other
stationary noise sources where technology exists.
7. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall be located to
create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-sensitive receptors
nearest the project site.
8. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are imposed on
construction activities, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. This condition
applies to all heavy construction equipment that vibrates.
9. 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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
Complying with Noise 1 and Noise 2 will reduce interior noise levels to a level below the
County’s interior standard of 45 dBA DNL and will reduce the amount of construction
generated noise during project construction stages. By incorporating mitigation measures Noise
1 and Noise 2, the project shall have a less than significant impact on temporary or permanent
increases in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site, and the project will
substantially comply with the Noise Element of the County’s General Plan.
b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project for a 24-unit
is a type of use that will not consist of any manufacturing, processing, or other activities that
would typically result in excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise would be
273
DRAFT
38
temporary in nature and would be limited to the restricted construction hours as typically
conditioned for development permits approved by the County. These groundborne vibrations
would be temporary in duration, however, nearby residences, business, and/or schools may be
affected. Nevertheless, implementation of mitigation measure Noise 2 will reduce potential
project impacts (that would result in the generation of groundborne vibration or noise to less
than significant levels.
c) No Impact: The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip,
nor is it located within an area covered by the County’s Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
The nearest airport facility is the Buchanan Field, approximately 2.3 miles southeast of the
project site. Thus, the proposed project would not expose people to excessive noise levels from
either Buchanan Field or a private airstrip and there is no impact.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Noise Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30921/Ch11-Noise-
Element?bidId=
• Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc, “Windhover Terrace Apartments Noise Assessment.”
Prepared by Michael Thill. Received on May 12, 2022.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The project includes the construction of a three-story
apartment building that proposes 24-units of residential (apartments) living spaces. Based
on the United States Census Burau’s estimate of 2.48 persons per household (between
2017-2021) for Martinez, the project would potentially increase the population by an
estimated 60 people. Since this project would result in a relatively small change in the
population (per the United States Census Bureau date July 1, 2022, Martinez has an
estimated population of 36,447), which means that the project would result in an
approximately 0.16% percent increase in population for the area. This population increase
would not require the extension of roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, the project
would be less than significant.
274
DRAFT
39
b) No Impact: The proposed residential development will be constructed on a vacant lot that
has been previously zoned for multi-family residential development. There is no need to
alter or remove any of the surrounding residential units in order to establish the proposed
development. Thus, the construction and establishment of the proposed 24-unit apartment
complex would not displace any person, nor necessitate the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.
Sources of Information
• United States Census Bureau. “U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Martinez city,
California” accessed in 2022.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: Fire protection and emergency medical response services for the
project vicinity are provided by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. The project
site is located within a 2.3 mile drive from Contra Costa County Fire Station 14, 2.7 mile drive
from Contra Costa County Fire Station 9 and 3.3 mile drive from Contra Costa County Fire
Station 13. The project is required to comply with the applicable provisions of the California
Fire Code, the California Residential Code, and the Contra Costa County Ordinances that
pertain to emergency access, fire suppression systems, and fire detection/warning systems. The
proposed project has been reviewed by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. In a
comment letter dated November 15, 2021, the fire district reviewed the project and did not
indicate that a new fire protection facility would be needed as a result of the project. When it
comes time to submit for building permits for the proposed project, the construction drawings
would have to be reviewed and approved by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
As a result, the project’s potential impacts on fire protection would be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: Police protection and patrol services in the unincorporated
Martinez area and the project vicinity are provided by the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s office.
The Public Facilities/Services Element of the County General Plan requires 155 square feet of
station area per 1,000 population in unincorporated Contra Costa County. As discussed earlier
275
DRAFT
40
in this study, the proposed project will create 24 residential (apartment units) which could
potentially increase the population by an estimated 60 people (as discussed in the Population
and Housing Section above.) This minimal population increase would not impact the County’s
ability to maintain a Sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of station area and support
facilities per 1,000 members of the population. Thus, the project would not result in the need
for new or expanded police protection facilities or services in the County.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Martinez
Unified School District and would induce a student increase to their classroom numbers. The
project was referred to the Martinez Unified School District for comments. At the time of the
completion of this study, no indication was received from the school district that expansion of
existing school facilities would be necessary. However, to address student growth in school
districts as a result of residential developments in the County, a per-square-foot school fee
amount is determined by the school district. Prior to issuing building permits, the County
Building Inspection Division collects the school fees on behalf of the respective school district
as part of the overall building permit fees or requires a receipt showing payment of the
applicable fee to the school district. Payment of the development fees pursuant to State
regulations for school services would reduce impacts to neighborhood schools to less than
significant levels.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The policy for Parks and Recreation in the Growth Management
element of the County General Plan indicates that a standard of 3 acres of neighborhood parks
per 1,000 persons should be maintained within the County. As stated previously, the project
would not cause a significant population increase in the Martinez community. The applicant has
proposed to landscape 20% of the project site as an outdoor area for use of future residents.
While the project as proposed will not result in a significant increase in the County population,
all residential projects are required to pay a Park Dedication and Park Impact fees which are
adopted by the County Board of Supervisors to the County, which will be used to acquire park
land and develop parks and recreation facilities to serve new residential development in the
unincorporated County. Therefore, as the applicant has elected to pay an in-lieu fee instead of
constructing new park areas in order to comply with the County Park Dedication Ordinance,
there is no potential for the proposed project resulting in a substantial adverse environmental
impact as a result of the construction of new or expanded parks.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: During staff’s initial review of the proposed development and
prior to deeming the project complete, project-specific comments were solicited from various
local agencies and other interested parties in order to alert County staff and the applicant to any
additional permitting, improvements, etc., that may be required as part of the project. Among
the groups solicited for this project were the Contra Costa County Water District and MT. View
Sanitary District. No indication of a need for new or expanded facilities was provided in the
comments.
The Contra Costa Library operates 28 facilities in Contra Costa County, including the Martine
– Contra Costa County Library, located approximately 2.3 miles west of the project site. The
Contra Costa Library system is primarily funded by local property taxes, with additional
revenue from intergovernmental sources. A portion of the property taxes on the project site
276
DRAFT
41
would go to the Contra Costa Library system. Accordingly, the impact of the use of the public
libraries by people living in the 60 residential (apartment) units would be less than significant.
Contra Costa County Health Services District (CCCHSD) operates a regional medical center
(hospital) and 10 health centers and clinics in the County. CCCHSD is primarily funded by
federal and state funding programs, with additional revenue from local taxes. Since significant
impacts to public facilities, such as hospitals are usually caused by substantial increases in
population, the potential impact of the use of public health facilities by people living in the 60
residential (apartment) units would be less than significant.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Public Facilities/Services Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30917/Ch7-Public-
Facilities_Services-Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Growth Management Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30914/Ch4-Growth-
Management-Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District “File #CDDP21-03031.” Dated
November 15, 2021.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed development will induce a small population
increase in the area, and as a result, it is anticipated that the use of neighborhood and regional
parks in the area will also increase. Pursuant to the Growth Management Element of the County
General Plan, the standard is to have a minimum of 3 acres of neighborhood parks for every
1,000 members of the population. The project includes the construction of a new 24-unit
apartment complex that will increase the population by approximately 60 persons. This
potential increase in population would not be significant enough to warrant the need for a new
park, or substantially accelerate the deterioration of any existing parks or other recreational
facilities. Additionally, the applicant will be required to pay Park dedication in-lieu fees as part
of the project. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially deteriorate existing park
facilities.
277
DRAFT
42
b) Less Than Significant Impact: As previously stated, the potential increase in population would
not be significant enough to warrant the need to construct or expand recreational facilities.
Additionally, the applicant will be required to pay the County mandated park impact fee for
each apartment unit. Park fees are collected to fund the acquisition and development of parks in
Contra Costa County to serve unincorporated County residents.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. “Park Dedication
and Park Impact Fees.” Accessed in 2022.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/42080/Park- Fees-
Overview?bidId=.
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
17. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project:
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject property fronts Windhover Way. Windhover Way is
35 feet wide with two 10.5-foot travel lanes and parallel parking permitted on both sides. It has
a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph. Windhover Way intersects with Pacheco Boulevard
approximately 160 feet south of the proposed location for the project driveway. Pacheco
Boulevard is classified as a Route of Significance and is oriented in the east-west direction. It
has one travel lane and a bike lane in each direction together with a two-way left-turn lane. The
posted speed limit is 45 mph. Parking is permitted on both sides where there is sufficient width.
Policy 4-c of the Growth Management Element of the General Plan, and Chapter 82-32
(Transportation Demand Management) require a traffic impact analysis of any project that is
estimated to generate 100 or more AM or PM peak-hour trips. In order to evaluate the project, a
“Transportation Impact Analysis for the Apartments Residential Development Project,” study
was prepared by W-Trans and received by the County on September 7, 2022. The anticipated
trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021 for
“Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)” (ITE LU #220). The site is currently undeveloped and
therefore not generating any trips. For a conservative analysis, trip reductions resulting from
278
DRAFT
43
nearby transportation options were not applied. Further reductions attributable to internal
capture, pass-by or any other trip reductions are not applicable and therefore have also not been
applied. The expected trip generation potential for the proposed project is indicated in Table 1
below. The proposed project is expected to generate an average of 162 trips per day, including
10 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 12 during the p.m. peak hour; these new trips represent
the increase in traffic associated with the project.
Chapter 82-32 of the County Code requires the preparation of a “Transportation Demand
Management” (TDM) program, for all residential projects with 13 or more dwelling units. The
TDM Ordinance Guide encourages the use of creative and effective ways to reduce motor
vehicle trips and their associated impacts created by new development projects. To minimize
parking demand and reduce vehicle trips, the applicant may consider, but should not be limited
to, reducing the number of parking spaces, providing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure,
providing transit passes, unbundling the price of parking from rent, providing emerging
mobility options (e.g., electric scooters, bike share, etc.), and other strategies commonly used to
minimize parking demand and automobile trips. Thus, W-Trans prepared a draft TDM program
dated September 13, 2022 and received by the County on September 22, 2022 for the
Apartment complex which recommends similar TDM measures. The draft TDM program
concluded that the proposed pedestrian bicycle and transit facilities would be adequate to serve
the project as proposed; the number of short and long term bicycle parking spaces proposed
would be greater than the County’s requirement and that the implementation of the TDM
program would reduce vehicle trips. Staff of the County’s Transportation Planning division
further recommends that a final TDM Program and a TDM Coordinator be required as
conditions of approval.
Since the proposed project would generate less than 100 peak hour trips, a traffic impact
analysis is not required in accordance with General Plan Policy 4-c. In addition, as
recommended by County Transportation Planning staff, compliance with the County’s Electric
Vehicle (EV) Ordinance and requiring a final TDM program and a TDM Coordinator as
conditions of approval would ensure that the project results in a less than significant impact on
programs, plans, ordinances or policies regarding transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: CEQA provides guidelines for analyzing transportation impacts
relating to vehicle miles travelled (VMT) resulting from the project. The Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) established recommendations for identifying and mitigating
transportation impacts within CEQA and published a final Technical Advisory in December of
2018 that advises lead agencies to conduct a screening process to “quickly identify when a
project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed
study.” As mentioned above, W-Trans prepared a “Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation”
279
DRAFT
44
on behalf of the project applicant to identify whether the project would be expected to cause a
significant impact and, thus, require a detailed VMT study. W-Trans identified the following
project screening criteria as part of their assessment.
Consideration was given to the project’s potential generation of Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT). As a result of SB 743, the Board of Supervisors adopted a VMT policy on June 23,
2020, in their document Transportation Analysis Guidelines. Guidance provided in this
document recommends the use of screening thresholds to identify when a proposed project is
presumed to result in a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study.
According to the Contra Costa County Travel Demand Model estimates, the Countywide home-
based average VMT per resident is 19.4 miles. Concurring with guidance provided by this
document, a project located anywhere in the County which generates a VMT that is 15-percent
or more below this value, or 16.5 miles per resident, should be expected to cause a less-than-
significant VMT impact and would not require further VMT analysis.
The project would be located within Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 20034 of the Contra Costa
Travel Demand Model which has a home-based VMT of 16.0 miles per resident. Because this
per capita VMT rate of 16.0 is lower than the significance threshold of 16.5 miles, the project is
presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact and does not require further VMT
analysis. Further, adjacent TAZs west of I-680, including 20033 and 20038, also have a per
capita VMT rate that is less than the significance threshold so are consistent with TAZ 20034.
A summary of the VMT findings is provided in Table 4 below.
As shown in the table above, the project will a lower VMT rate than the significance threshold.
Per CEQA section 15064.3(b) – Determining the Significant of Transportation Impacts, a
transportation project that does not exceed the significant threshold is considered to have a less
than significant transportation impact. Therefore is determined to not be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.2(b).
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The subject property fronts Windhover Way, which is 35 feet
wide with two 10.5-foot travel lanes and parallel parking permitted on both sides. It has a prima
facie speed limit of 25 mph. As shown on Figure 5-2 (Roadway Network Plan) of the General
Plan Transportation and Circulation Element, Windhover Way is not considered to be an
existing or proposed arterial, expressway, or freeway. According to the project plans, the site
will have access from a private driveway located on Windhover Way, approximately 160 feet
north of Pacheco Boulevard. This will be the only access point to and from the proposed
280
DRAFT
45
project. The proposed apartment building will be setback approximately 100 feet from the
roadway entrance, therefore, not creating any site obstructions or hazards in relation to the
Windhover Way circulation. As part of the review process, the County referred the project out
to the Contra Costa County Public Works Department for review. In a Staff Report dated
December 19, 2022, the Public Works Department stated that there is no need to “further
widening or frontage improvements are necessary with this development,” and provided a
standard condition of approval that requires the applicant to adhere to Chapter 82-18,
“Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveway with
Windover Way in accordance with Chapter 82-18 “Sight Obstructions at Intersections” of the
County Ordinance Code. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight
distance at this intersection, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining walls, or
other obstructions proposed at this intersection shall be setback to ensure that the sight line is
clear of any obstructions.” No substantial changes to the existing transportation system are
proposed with this application. Compliance with the Public Works conditions of approval will
result in the project having a less than significant impact on the Windhover Way right-of-way
and is not expected to substantially increase hazards due to geometric design features or
incompatible uses.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project was referred to the Contra Costa County Fire
Protection District for agency comments. In a comment letter dated November 15, 2021, the
Fire Protection District stated that the project shall comply with the applicable California Fire
Code, the California Building Code, the California Residential Code and Local and County
Ordinances and adopted standards. All construction plans will be subject to the applicable Fire
Code that is in effect at the time when the application for a building permit is submitted.
Additionally, the applicant will work with the Fire Protection District to submit construction
plans for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Therefore, the routine review
of construction plans will ensure that the proposed project has no potential for adversely
impacting existing emergency access to the subject property or other properties within the
County.
Sources of Information
• Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Growth Management Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30914/Ch4-Growth-
Management-Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 5: Transportation and Circulation
Element.” 2005-2020. http://www.co.contra-
costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/30915/Ch5-Transportation-and-Circulation-
Element?bidId=.
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “0 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez.” Agency
Comment Response Letter. Dated November 15, 2021.
• Contra Costa County Public Works. “Development Permit DP21-3031Staff Report and
Recommended Conditions of Approval’ Dated December 19, 2022.
• W-Trans “Transportation Impact Analysis for the Gulway Apartments Residential
Development Project.” Dated September 6, 2022 and received on September 7, 2022.
281
DRAFT
46
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
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:
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:
a-b) Less than Significant Impact With Mitigation: As discussed in the Cultural Resources section
5of this study, there are no known existing structures located at the project site that are listed on
the Contra Costa County’s Historic Resource Inventory, or the California’s Register of
Historical Resources, or the National Register of Historic places, nor is there any building or
structure that qualifies to be listed. The project site is vacant. In addition, the project was
referred out to the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to which they
responded in a letter dated November 22, 2021, stating that “the proposed project area has a
low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological sites.” Additionally, there is no
evidence in the record at the time of completion of this study that indicates the presence of
human remains at the project site. On May 23 and May 24, 2021, a Notice of Opportunity to
Request Consultation for the proposed Apartment Building was sent to the Wilton Rancheria
and the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation, two California Native American tribes that are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area. No requests for consultation or
responses regarding tribal cultural resources have been received from California Native
American tribes at the time of completion of this study.
Potential Impact: As discussed previously in Section 5, subsurface construction activities have
the potential to damage or destroy previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources.
Therefore, the implementation of Mitigation Measure Cultural 1 and Mitigation Measure
Geology 6 will ensure that project-related impacts to previously undiscovered and unknown
cultural resources will be less than significant.
Sources of Information
• California Historical Resources Information System. “CDDP21-03031 / APN 380-220-
066 on Pacheco Blvd, Martinez / Calichi Design Group.” Dated November 22, 2021
282
DRAFT
47
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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 storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable
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) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located in a developed, urbanized area of
Unincorporated Martinez, which is served by existing water, sewer, storm drain, electric power,
natural gas and telecommunications services. There is no indication from any utility service
provider that the proposed residential complex would result in a need to relocate, expand, or
construct new facilities in such a way as to cause significant environmental effects.
Water: The new development is located within the service area of the Contra Costa Water
District. Project plans have been sent to the Water District as part of the initial review process.
In a letter dated November 18, 2021, the Water District provided comments stating that the new
development will require a fire service, a domestic service and an irrigation service. The letter
also requested that the applicant work with the Water District engineering services to request
water service for the site. The Contra Costa Water District staff has reviewed the project
application documents regarding the provision of new water service pursuant to their water
service regulations and there has been no indication from the water company that the proposed
project would exceed the capacity of the existing public water infrastructure.
Wastewater treatment: The project is within the MT. View Sanitary District service area, which
is the agency responsible for ensuring that applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board are met and maintained. The wastewater generated by
24 new apartment dwelling units would incrementally increase wastewater flows in the MT.
View Sanitary District system. Project plans have been sent to MT. View Sanitary District as
283
DRAFT
48
part of the initial review process, and there is no indication that the proposed project would
exceed their ability to provide sewer services with the currently available facilities. In a
returned comment letter dated November 17, 2021, MT. View Sanitary District requested that
the applicant submit sewer improvement plans to the District and that a sewer permit
application shall be required to be obtained from the District. Therefore, there is no indication
that the project would require expansion of the wastewater treatment system.
Storm water drainage: As discussed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section above, the
applicant has submitted a preliminary Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) designed with project
storm water controls including permeable AC pavements to be used in the parking stalls,
landscaping and bioretention facilities. The project proposes to capture stormwater runoff from
the site into a bioretention facility onsite which will discharge to an existing 18” storm drain in
Windhover Way. The applicant also is requesting an exception to Division 914 of the County
Ordinance. The storm water and drainage facilities were reviewed by the Contra Costa County
Public Works department and in a Staff Report and Recommended Conditions of Approval
dated December 19, 2022, Public Works stated that they are not averse to granting the
exception. Additionally, they deemed the applicant submitted Preliminary Stormwater Control
Plan dated February 22, preliminary complete. Conditions of approval from Public Works is
required a final Stormwater Control Plan which will be submitted prior to the applicant
obtaining a building permit. The Final Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP) will be accompanied
by a Stormwater Control operation and Maintenance Plan and will be required to be in
compliance with the County’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and shall be
consistent with the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance.
Based on the incorporation of a SWCP to control the increased runoff, the review by the
County agency responsible for enforcing drainage standards, and upon implementation of the
conditions of approval from the Contra Costa County Public Works Department, the proposed
project would have a less than significant adverse environmental impact on stormwater or
wastewater treatment facilities.
Electric/Natural Gas: The project is within the service territory of PG&E for electric and natural
gas service. It is anticipated that the project will connect to underground electric and/or natural
gas connections. There is no indication that the construction of new or expanded electric or
natural gas services is required for the ongoing operation of the project. Temporary power for
construction activities would also be provided by PG&E. The applicant will be required to
apply for temporary power and follow the permitting process for connecting to the electrical
grid.
Telecommunication Services: Existing telephone, cellular, internet, and cable television are
available within the project site’s vicinity. The project site would connect to these services
provided by several different providers, and there is no indication that the 24 new residential
units would result in the need for expanded services such as new or larger wireless facilities.
By following the processes required to connect to existing water, wastewater treatment, storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the impacts of the
project concerning these utilities and services would be less than significant.
284
DRAFT
49
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is presently served by municipal water supplies
from the Contra Costa Water District. According to County records, the project parcel is not
located in an area with a Groundwater Act. As discussed in subsection-a above, the new
development will be required to work with the Contra Costa Water District. The Water District
staff has reviewed the project application documents regarding the provision of new water
service pursuant to their water service regulations and there has been no indication from the
water company that the existing public water infrastructure would have insufficient water
supplies to serve the project, or that the project would have a significant impact on the public
water infrastructure during dry, and multiple dry years.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: As discussed in subsection-a above, the new development is
within the MT. View Sanitary District, which is the agency responsible for ensuring that
applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board are
net and maintained. Project plans were sent to the MT. View Sanitary District as part of the
initial review process, and there has been no indication from them that the proposed project
would exceed their ability to provide sewer services with the currently available facilities. Nor
is there any indication that the project would require expansion of the wastewater treatment
system. In a comment letter dated November 17, 2021, the District is requiring the applicant to
submit sewer improvement plans for review and approval and to submit a sewer permit for the
final District approval. The Sanitary District would connect the dwelling units to its facilities
after processing the residential sewer service application and collecting the applicable
connection fees, completing a building plan review, and issuing a permit for sewer work. By
following this process, the impacts related to the wastewater treatment requirements of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Francisco Bay Region or the Mt. View
Sanitary facilities would be less than significant.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would generate construction solid waste
and post-construction residential solid waste. Construction on the project site would be subject
to the CalGreen Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Program administered by the
Department of Conservation and Development at the time of application for a building permit.
The Debris Recovery Program requires that at least 65% of construction job site debris (by
weight) for all new residential buildings requiring permits that would otherwise be sent to
landfills be recycled, reused, or otherwise diverted to appropriate recycling facilities. Thus,
although future construction of the apartment buildings would incrementally add to the
construction waste, the impact of the project-related increase would be considered to be less
than significant.
The proposed project would be comprised of residential apartment units, which would generate
the type of solid waste similar to that of other medium density residential uses in the vicinity.
The apartment building will be required to comply with the County Ordinance which requires
solid waste collection for all three waste streams (garbage, recycling and organics.) The project
plans indicate that there will be a proposed trash enclosure located behind the frontage, near the
front of the building. Regular solid wase removal for households in the Martinez area is
provided by Republic Services, which also provides recycling and green waste removal
services. Household waste is ultimately destined for the Keller Canyon Landfill, which has
enough approximate capacity to continue accepting waste for the next 50 years. Household
285
DRAFT
50
waste from the 24-unit apartment project would incrementally add to the household waste
headed to the landfill. However, the potential for the proposed project to exceed the capacity of
the currently utilized landfill is minimal, and the impact of the project-related waste would be
considered to be less than significant.
e) Less Than Significant Impact: As mentioned above, construction at the project site would be
subject to the CalGreen Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Program administered
by the Department of Conservation and Development. The Debris Recovery Program requires
that at least 65% of construction job site debris (by weight) for most construction types, that
would otherwise be sent to landfills, be recycled, reused, or otherwise diverted to appropriate
recycling facilities. The proposed project is not expected to produce significant amounts of
waste that would present a greater conflict with laws and regulations regarding solid waste than
similar multiple and single-family residences in the vicinity. Furthermore, the owner,
construction contractor, and future tenants would be subject to applicable federal, state, and
local laws related to solid waste. Therefore, the potential for conflict with Federal, State, and
local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste is less than
significant.
Sources of Information
• CalGreen / Construction & Demolition Debris Recovery Program
http://www.cccounty.us/4746/CalGreen-Construction-Demolition-Debris-
• Contra Costa County Public Works Department. “Development Permit DP21-03031
Staff Report & Findings and Conditions of Approval.” Dated December 19, 2022.
• Contra Costa Water District. “CCWD Comments on the Windhover Project (County
File Number: CDD21-03031).” Dated November 18, 2021.
• MT. View Sanitary District. “Review of Windhover Way Apartments Application
Package; MVSD Conditions of Approval.” Dated November 17, 2021.
• Republic Services. “Welcome to Republic Services of Unincorporated Contra Costa
County, CA”. website, accessed June 26, 2023.
https://www.republicservices.com/municipality/unincorporated-ccc-ca
286
DRAFT
51
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
20. WILDFIRE – If located in or near the 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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact: The site is not located in an area of State Responsibility Area
according to the Contra Costa County’s State Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones
on the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire Hazard Severity Map. The
project site is not located near any state responsibility lands classified as a Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone. The nearest State Responsibility Area High or Very High Fire zone is
located more than 2.5 miles to the west. The project is located in a Local Responsibility Area
classified as Urban Unzoned. The project site is in a developed area within the service area of
the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). The project was routed to the
CCFPD, who did not indicate any concerns with an elevated risk of wildfires for the site. The
project will be required to comply with current fire codes, including those pertaining to fire
sprinklers in new buildings, and driveway and roadway access for firefighting apparatus, and
would not require the installation or maintenance of additional infrastructure such as roads or
fuel breaks that may exacerbate fire risk. Additionally, the applicant will be required to submit
construction plans to the fire department for review and approval before any building permits
will be issued to ensure compliance with the applicable fire and building codes. Therefore, the
routine review of construction plans will ensure that final construction plans will not result in a
condition with inadequate emergency vehicle access.
b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, the risk of exposing
project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire is less than significant. The project is located on a lot with a slight slope, however,
surrounding parcels are relatively flat and within an urbanized area and, thus, would not expose
people or structures to significant risks as a result of post-fire slope instability or runoff.
Development will be subject to review and approval by the Contra Costa County Fire
287
DRAFT
52
Protection District. It is expected that compliance with the California Fire Code, California
Building Code, California Residential Code and Local and County Ordinances, will keep the
project-related risks associated with wildfires at less than significant levels.
c) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The project does not require
any road widening or frontage improvements. The project was reviewed by the CCCFPD and
does not require the installation of emergency roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources that
may exacerbate fire risk. Additionally, Chapter 96-10 of the County Ordinance Code requires
all new utility distribution services to be installed underground, thereby reducing fire risk in the
area. Thus, project-related risks (regarding installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure associated with fire risks) shall have a less than significant impact on the
environment.
d) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The project site contains a
slight slope but does not contain any hills or steep topography. Moreover, the surrounding area
is relatively flat and is not near a major body of water that would be susceptible to flooding.
Therefore, the risk of exposing people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes is
less than significant.
Sources of Information
• California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County Very High
Fire Hazzard Severity Zones in LRA.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “0 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez.” Dated
November 15, 2021.
288
DRAFT
53
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
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?
SUMMARY:
a) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation: Although the development of the proposed
multi-family residential complex would be contained within the 32,820 square foot project site,
due to the undeveloped nature of the project site, it has the potential for impacting the
environment. As stated in this Initial Study, the project is located in an area that is vacant and
surrounding by urbanized uses. There is no evidence in the record that the site or surrounding
area contains substantial habitat for fish or a wildlife species or will reduce a rare or endangered
plant or eliminate an important period in California history. The project was referred to
numerous agencies who provided comments on the project stating that impacts would be
minimal. However, due to the undeveloped nature of the project, there is a potential for
impacting the environment in relation to undiscovered resources. The project would not
substantially degrade the quality of the natural environment because the potentially significant
impacts regarding aesthetics, cultural/tribal resources, air quality, noise, geology/soils as
identified throughout this initial study, can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Where
mitigation measures are enforced as proposed in this Initial Study, the measures will be
conditions of approval of the proposed project and the applicant will be responsible for
implementation of the measures. Therefore, the potential for substantial impacts to the
environment or other resources related to the environment as a result of the proposed project is
reduced to a less than significant level.
b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project site is located within
the Urban Limit Line in an area that has been designated for multiple-family high-density
residential development. The number of housing units in the Martinez area would increase by
289
DRAFT
54
24-units with the proposed project. The project site is the only vacant parcel located on
Windhover Way and is one of a few vacant parcels within a two-mile radius. Staff is aware of
one substantial development project in the immediate vicinity within the Martinez area that is
under review. Staff is unaware of any substantial development projects in the nearby Martinez
area that have recently been approved. The project under review is as follows:
1. (County File #CDDP22-03036) The project includes a Development Plan modification to
allow for a 33-unit multi-family residential project in four buildings on two lots with 78 on-
site parking spaces. The application also includes a Vesting Tentative Map to allow a 33-unit
multi-family residential subdivision. The development would be located on APN 380-220-
044, 3845 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez, CA 94553. The project is currently deemed incomplete
during the 30-day application review.
This area of the County is readily serviced by the public services and utilities such as water,
power, sanitary, and fire protection. The Community Development Division (CDD) generally
solicits project specific comments from these agencies as part of the application review process,
and design modifications are made based on the advice of each respective agency. The
consulted agencies are the governing bodies with proficient knowledge of the needs of their
existing infrastructure, and no indication of potential impacts or the need for new or expanded
services was noted for the project proposal. Therefore, County CDD staff’s consultation with
outside agencies for each project and with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures
for this proposed project reduces the potential for significant cumulative environmental impacts
related to new or expanded utilities to a less than significant level.
The proposed project will have temporary impacts that would occur as a result of construction
activities that would be mitigated at the project level. No long-term adverse impacts are
anticipated to occur, and as such, the incremental effects of the project would not be
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. With the implementation of the
mitigations described in the sections above, the proposed project would not result in
cumulatively considerable impacts on the environment.
c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: This Initial Study has disclosed
potential impacts on human beings that would be less than significant with the implementation
of mitigation measures. All identified mitigation measures will be included as conditions of
approval for the proposed project, and the applicant will be responsible for implementation of
the measures. As a result, there would not be any environmental effects that will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
290
REFERENCES
In the process of preparing the Initial Study Checklist and conduction of the evaluation, the cited
references were consulted. Reference materials are available for review by contacting Everett Louie,
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development, by email at
everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us or by phone at (925) 655-2873
1. Project Applicant and Plans for County File #CDDP21-03031
2. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 9: Open Space Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30919/Ch9-Open-Space-
Element?bidId=
3. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 5: Transportation and Circulation Element,”
2005-2020. http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/30915/Ch5-
Transportation-and- Circulation-Element?bidId=
4. California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
5. Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2017.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
6. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. “Spare the Air, Cool the Climate Final, 2017
Clean Air.” Adopted 19 April 2017. http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-
andresearch/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-
pdf.pdf?la=en.
7. Contra Costa County. “Climate Action Plan.” Adopted by the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors on 15 December 2015.
http://www.co.contracosta.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/39791/Contra-Costa-County-
Climate-Action-Plan?bidId=.
8. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 8: Conservation Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30918/Ch8-Conservation-
Element?bidId=
9. California Department of Fish and Wildlife Lands. Public Access Lands Map. Accessed May
28,2021. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/lands/
10. Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Division 816 – Trees.
https://library.municode.com/ca/contra_costa_county/codes/ordinance_code?nodeId=TIT8Z
O_DIV816TR
291
11. California Department of Conservation. California Historical Resources. https://ohp.parks
.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=7
12. Contra Costa County Historic Resources Inventory (2019) - https://www.contracosta
.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1116/Historic-Resources-Inventory-HRI?bidId
13. California Historical Resources Information System Letter Dated November 22, 2021.
14. California Air Resources Board, Assembly Bill 32 Overview
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm
15. California Energy Commission 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2022standards/
16. California Division of Mines and Geology - Special Publication 42.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/Special-
Publications/SP_042.pdf
17. California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Map.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/
18. Contra Costa County General Plan. “Chapter 10: Safety Element.” 2005-2020.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30920/Ch10-Safety-
Element?bidId=
19. United States Geologic Survey. Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014-
2043. August, 2016. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf
20. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil
Survey Map. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
21. Darwin Myers Associates. “Geologic Peer Review – CDDP21-0303,” Dated November 19.
2021.
22. California Department of Public Health FAQs About Asbestos in the Home and Workplace,
2017.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/CDPH%20Document
%20Library/AsbestosFactSheet_201711_final-ADA.pdf
23. California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor. Hazardous Waste and
Substances Site List. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp
292
24. California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment
Program. Contra Costa County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA, 2009.
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf
25. California State Geoportal. “California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer.” Accessed in 202.
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414.
26. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. “CCCFPD Project No.:P-2021-05611.” Dated
November 15, 2021.
27. CALICHI DESIGN GROUP. “Stormwater Control Plan for DP21-3031).” Dated February
15, 2022.
28. Contra Costa Clean Water Program, C3 Guidance: Development, https://www.cccleanwater
.org/construction-business/development
29. Contra Costa County Public Works CDP21-03031 Staff Report & Recommended Conditions
of Approval dated December 19, 2022.
30. Contra Costa County Tsunami Hazard Areas, California Department of Conservation, 2021.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/contra-costa
31. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Land Use Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
32. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Noise Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30921/Ch11-Noise-Element?bidId=
33. Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc, “Windhover Terrace Apartments Noise Assessment.” Prepared by
Michael Thill. Received on May 12, 2022.
34. United States Census Bureau. “U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Martinez city, California”
accessed in 2022.
35. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Public Facilities/Services Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30917/Ch7-Public-
Facilities_Services-Element?bidId=
36. Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005-2020. Growth Management Element.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30914/Ch4-Growth-Management-
Element?bidId=
37. Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development. “Park Dedication and
Park Impact Fees.” Accessed in 2022.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/42080/Park- Fees-Overview?bidId=.
293
38. W-Trans “Transportation Impact Analysis for the Gulway Apartments Residential
Development Project.” Dated September 6, 2022 and received on September 7, 2022.
39. CalGreen / Construction & Demolition Debris Recovery Program http://www.cccounty.us
/4746/CalGreen-Construction-Demolition-Debris-
40. Contra Costa Water District. “CCWD Comments on the Windhover Project (County File
Number: CDD21-03031).” Dated November 18, 2021.
41. MT. View Sanitary District. “Review of Windhover Way Apartments Application Package;
MVSD Conditions of Approval.” Dated November 17, 2021.
42. Republic Services. “Welcome to Republic Services of Unincorporated Contra Costa County,
CA”. website, accessed June 26, 2023.
https://www.republicservices.com/municipality/unincorporated-ccc-ca
43. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County Very High Fire
Hazzard Severity Zones in LRA.
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-
Element?bidId=
294
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
County File #CDDP21-03031
24-Unit Windhover Terrace Apartments
North of Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd Intersection
Martinez, CA 94553
July 11, 2023
295
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 2 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
SECTION 1: AESTHETICS
Potentially Significant Impacts: Project lighting could spill off-site and result in a potentially
significant adverse environmental impact due to substantial new light and glare on neighboring
properties. (Introduction of new light sources).
Mitigation Measures(s):
Aesthetics 1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the (CDD) for
review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the proposed light
post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed down and
screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent glare or
excessive light spillover.
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents; during
grading/construction activities
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff
Compliance Verification: Review of construction drawings
SECTION 3: AIR QUALITY
Potentially Significant Impacts: Future grading and construction activities on the project site
would result in localized emissions of dust, diesel exhaust, and combustion emissions that could
result in potential, if temporary, air quality impacts to sensitive receptors (e.g., nearby residences,
schools) from the project site during project construction.
Mitigation Measure(s):
Air Quality 1: The following mitigations shall be included on all construction plans and
implemented throughout the construction phase of the project:
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 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.
296
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 3 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
5. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
6. 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.
8. 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 shall be provided for construction workers at all
access points.
9. 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.
10. The property owner or site contractor shall 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.
11. Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a
6- to 12-inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
12. All contractors shall use equipment that meets the California Air Resources Board’s
(CARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.
.
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents, and
throughout construction-related activity.
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff.
Compliance Verification: Review of Construction Drawings. Photographic evidence
of posted sign. Onsite inspection and monitoring of
construction vehicles, equipment, and project site.
SECTION 5: CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially Significant Impacts: Although there is no evidence that there is any specific cultural
resources known in in the project area, there is nevertheless a potential for previously unknown
297
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 4 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
cultural resources to be uncovered during construction activities requiring excavation or earth
movement.
Mitigation Measure(s):
CULTURAL-1: The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground
disturbance and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed below are
included on the construction plans. If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the
discovery shall be redirected. A qualified archaeologist certified by the Society for California
Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA), and the Native
American Tribe that has requested consultation and/or demonstrated interest in the project
shall be contacted to evaluate the significance of the finds and suggest appropriate
mitigation(s) if deemed necessary.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading, or
trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if they observe
any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural resource discovery (e.g.,
wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies;
deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of
the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the
finds and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the
County and other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be mitigated.
Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be prepared
documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report should be submitted
to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of a
Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage
Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the property and
provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave
goods.
298
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 5 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist should prepare
a report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for the
treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and
in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report should be submitted
to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Upon discovery of archaeological materials or human
remains
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff, consulting Archaeologist
Compliance Verification: Review of archaeologist’s report or other verification
provided to CDD staff
SECTION 7: GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Potentially Significant Impacts: The consulting geotechnical engineer indicates
potentially expansive and corrosive soils existing on the subject property which can be
detrimental to concrete and buried metal such as those used for utilities or reinforcing
steel. In addition, conditions in the field may vary from those expected based on field
investigation, laboratory tests, and engineering analysis performed by the consulting
engineer. Thus, it is critically important that adequate geotechnical review be provided.
Additionally, ground disturbance during the project’s construction phase has the potential
for disturbing previously unknown unique paleontological resources. In addition to the
mitigation measures for Cultural Resources, the following mitigation measures will ensure
that in the event unique paleontological resources are discovered, the proper actions are
taken to reduce the adverse environmental impacts to unique paleontological resources to
a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure(s):
GEOLOGY-1: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or
grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the project proponent shall submit
a geotechnical report update with the geotechnical review fee in the amount of $3,000,
referencing the proposed grading, drainage and foundation plans and providing specific
criteria and standards for site grading, drainage and foundation design based on adequate
subsurface data, laboratory testing of samples and engineering analysis. The scope of the
geotechnical investigation shall address the following potential hazards: (i) expansive soils,
(ii) corrosive soils, (iii) siting and design of any required bio-retention facilities and/or other
measures that may be recommended to achieve compliance with the clean water requirements
of the RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing undocumented fills and effective measures
299
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 6 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
to control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v) provide seismic parameters based on the
adopted California Building Code at the time that a residential building permit is requested.
GEOLOGY 2: Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or
grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, the geotechnical report update
required by Geology 1, above, shall be subject to review by the County’s peer review
geologist, and review/approval of the CDD. Improvement, grading and building plans shall
carry out the recommendations of the approved report.
GEOLOGY 3: Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of foundation-related
work) the project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential testing of the
graded building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid damage to
improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel).
GEOLOGY 4: The geotechnical report required by Geology 1 routinely includes
recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. These
services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer to
(i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed conditions
during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the basis of the
design recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the opportunity for field
modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID approval), based on exposed
conditions. The monitoring shall commence during clearing, and extend through grading,
including testing services during placement of engineered fill, installation of recommended
drainage facilities, and foundation related work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final”
grading inspection, pending submittal of a report from the project geotechnical engineer that
documents their observation and testing services during grading, installation of drainage
improvements.
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the apartment
building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer documenting the
monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-related geotechnical
recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier hole drilling/ foundation
preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g. collection of roof gutter runoff
in a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable discharge point; and possibly installation of
a subdrain system around the perimeter of the foundation to control moisture beneath the
foundation).
GEOLOGY 5: All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during the dry season
(April 15 through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be revegetated to
minimize erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion control work
shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved by the
Building Inspection Division.
300
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 7 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
GEOLOGY 6: Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during grading,
trenching, or other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials shall
be stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and,
if deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s).
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents
(GEOLOGY 1 , 2, 4); throughout construction-related
activity, and prior to final inspections (GEOLOGY 3). In
the event of paleontological materials being discovered
(GEOLOGY 6)
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff, Consulting Geotechnical
Engineer, County Geologist
Compliance Verification: Review of Geotechnical Engineer’s report; review of
construction drawings; or other verification provided to
CDD staff
SECTION 13: NOISE
Potentially Significant Impacts: As shown on Figure 11-5 O of the Noise Element, the subject
property is within an area of the County that is identified as having nose levels range above 60
decibels. The introduction of a new residential apartment building could introduce new noise
sources including temporary noise from construction activities. There may be periods of time
where there would be loud noise generated from the construction equipment, vehicles, and tools
that would impact nearby residences and businesses. Additionally, outdoor-to-indoor noise may
also be present due to the location of the project in close proximity to residences and Pacheco
boulevard.
Mitigation Measure(s):
NOISE-1: All windows and doors shall have the minimum ratings STC 26 and mechanical
ventilation installed for the building.
NOISE 2: The following construction restrictions shall be implemented during project
construction and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant
shall provide evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are included on the
face of the construction plans.
301
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 8 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
1. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to
adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all project-
related contractors. The applicant shall notify neighbors within 300 feet of the subject
property at least one week in advance of demolition, grading, and construction activities.
2. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random debris
and trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner. The project site must maintain and
keep dust down by watering the site by use of a water truck, water hose, street sweeping
and other dust control and maintenance measures.
3. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number and
person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall respond
and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number to call in complaints
shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
4. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal
combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate stationary
noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing residences
as possible.
5. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion
engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
6. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other
stationary noise sources where technology exists.
7. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall be
located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-
sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
8. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are imposed
on construction activities, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. This
condition applies to all heavy construction equipment that vibrates.
9. 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)
302
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 9 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Prior to CDD approval of construction documents and
throughout construction-related activity and prior to final
inspections; upon receipt of noise complaint(s)
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff
Compliance Verification: Review of Construction Drawings; submittal of pre-
construction meeting date to CDD staff; submittal of a
copy of notice and distribution list to the CDD; field
investigation (in the event of a noise complaint).
SECTION 18: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially Significant Impacts: There is always a potential to damage or destroy previously
undiscovered historic and prehistoric resources during construction related activities. Subsurface
construction activities have the potential to damage or destroy undiscovered historic and
prehistoric resources.
Mitigation Measure(s):
303
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 10 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
CULTURAL 1: The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground
disturbance and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of
plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first,
the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed below are
included on the construction plans. If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the
discovery shall be redirected. A qualified archaeologist certified by the Society for California
Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA), and the Native
American Tribe that has requested consultation and/or demonstrated interest in the project
shall be contacted to evaluate the significance of the finds and suggest appropriate
mitigation(s) if deemed necessary.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading, or
trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if they observe
any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural resource discovery (e.g.,
wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains; debris-filled wells or privies;
deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological
materials are encountered during ground disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of
the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the
finds and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the
County and other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be mitigated.
Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be prepared
documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report should be submitted
to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa County agencies.
If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of a
Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage
Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the property and
provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave
goods. Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist should
prepare a report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for
the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate
and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report should be
submitted to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
304
Abbreviations: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Condition of Approval (COA) CDDP21-03031
Community Development Division (CDD) Page 11 of 11
Building Inspection Division (BID)
GEOLOGY 6: Should unique paleontological materials be uncovered during grading,
trenching, or other on-site excavation(s), all earthwork within 30 yards of the materials shall
be stopped until the Community Development Division (CDD) has been notified, and a
qualified paleontologist contacted and retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and,
if deemed necessary, suggest appropriate mitigation(s).
Implementing Action: COA
Timing of Verification: Upon discovery of archaeological materials, human
remains or undiscovered historic and prehistoric
resources.
Party Responsible for Verification: Project proponent, CDD staff, consulting Archaeologist.
Compliance Verification: Submittal of archaeologist’s report to CDD.
305
July 19, 2023
Everett Louie, Project Planner
Department of Conservation and Development
Contra Costa County
30 Muir Road
Martinez, California 94553
Subject: Windhover Terrace Apartments – APN 380-220-066 (File Number: CDDP21-03031)
Dear Everett Louie:
The following are comments from the Contra Costa Water District (District) on this request for review of the
initial study and proposed mitigated negative declaration for the proposed Windhover Terrace Apartments
development. This proposed development would be 3 stories containing 24 units and would be
approximately 22,247 square feet. The proposed project site is a vacant lot located north of Windhover Way
and Pacheco Boulevard in unincorporated Martinez, CA 94553. The APN number of the site is 380-220-066 and
is within an area where the District serves treated water. The District previously provided comments on the
proposed development on November 18, 2021. Since then, the proposed development has changed from a 2-
story, 16-unit apartment complex to a 3-story, 24-unit apartment complex.
The District has reviewed the request and has the following comments:
1. The premise will require its own service connection, meter, fire service, and reduced pressure (RP)
backflow prevention device.
2. RP backflow prevention devices are above ground devices, which, in some cases could reduce water
pressure to below standard. Proper planning is necessary to ensure backflow prevention devices are
located outside the footprint of the building either in the “right of way” or in an easement provided by
applicant. A minimum of three-foot clearance is required around all above ground devices with no
vertical impediment. Similarly, fire service will also need to be placed above ground and meet this
clearance minimum. Previous plans from 2021 showed fire service placed in a vault located below
grade.
The District suggests that the applicant work with the District’s Engineering Services Coordinator, Cindy
Sweeney, for more details. She can be reached at 925-688-8014 or at csweeney@ccwater.com.
306
Everett Louie, Project Planner
Department of Conservation and Development
Contra Costa County
July 19, 2023
Page 2
Sincerely,
Cody Ericksen
Associate Planner
CE
307
1
Everett Louie
From:Steve Schmedinghoff <schmedinghoff1@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, July 15, 2023 2:22 PM
To:Everett Louie
Subject:#CDDP21-03031
Hello Everett
I have lived in my house since 1984 and am very aware of the local area. Please understand that there are reasons why
there were limitations placed on the development of the vacant lots that were intended for business and single story
homes. Windhover was never designed for lots of vehicular traffic. You only have to observe the narrow entrance from
Windhover to Pacheco (a very busy street) to realize this. This is narrow and usually the people at the end of
WindhoverWy usually park their vehicles right at the entrance. The traffic light at Camino Del Sol isn’t a way to mitigate
this as the south bound traffic backs up past the Windhover Wy intersection. And the Camino Del Sol trafic often is cross
traffic to Windhover during this cycle. Blocked up Windhover traffic would be a hazard to emergency vehicles during the
commute hours. Something the county Fire Chief should have some say. You will also receive complaints from the Court
people when they are leaving Martinez with a mitigated traffic signal holding them up even more.
Next is the issue of parking. Both Windhover Wy and Cormorant Ct aHello Everett
I have lived in my house since 1984 and am very aware of the local area. Please understand that there are reasons why
there were limitations placed on the development of the vacant lots that were intended for business and single story
homes. Windhover was never designed for lots of vehicular traffic. You only have to observe the narrow entrance from
Windhover to Pacheco (a very busy street) to realize this. This is narrow and usually the people at the end of
WindhoverWy usually park their vehicles right at the entrance. The traffic light at Camino Del Sol isn’t a way to mitigate
this as the south bound traffic backs up past the Windhover Wy intersection. And the Camino Del Sol trafic often is cross
traffic to Windhover during this cycle. Blocked up Windhover traffic would be a hazard to emergency vehicles during the
commute hours. Something the county Fire Chief should have some say. You will also receive complaints from the Court
people when they are leaving Martinez with a mitigated traffic signal holding them up even more.
Next is the issue of parking. Both Windhover Wy and Cormorant Ct already have many vehicles parked on the street. By
allowing a variance in the parking lot for the apartment complex there will be competition for parking on both streets.
This will likely result in double parking, again a hazard to emergency vehicles
None of this deals with issues and concerns of my neighbors that live adjacent to the lot about privacy from a three story
building viewing into the houses.
Don't forget that this variance will allow the other lot owner to take advantage of this variance to develop additional
apartments on the other side of the street increasing the above problems even more. All of this will decrease the
property value of the present homes and will require a separate traffic light at Pacheco and Windhover, a tax income
loss and extra expense to the county.
There are better ways and vacant lots dealing with these issues to increase housing in the county.
Steve and Jan Schmedinghoff
lready have many vehicles parked on the street. By allowing a variance in the parking lot for the apartment complex
there will be competition for parking on both streets. This will likely result in double parking, again a hazard to
emergency vehicles
None of this deals with issues and concerns of my neighbors that live adjacent to the lot about privacy from a three story
building viewing into the houses.
308
2
Don't forget that this variance will allow the other lot owner to take advantage of this variance to develop additional
apartments on the other side of the street increasing the above problems even more. All of this will decrease the
property value of the present homes and will require a separate traffic light at Pacheco and Windhover, a tax income
loss and extra expense to the county.
There are better ways and vacant lots dealing with these issues to increase housing in the county.
Steve and Jan Schmedinghoff
309
1
Everett Louie
From:Michael Cameron <mcame@cccfpd.org>
Sent:Wednesday, July 19, 2023 4:54 PM
To:Everett Louie
Subject:24 unit Windhover Terrance Apartments CDDP 21-03031
Mr. Louie,
I received a notice of intent to adopt a proposed mitigated negative declaration for the above project.
Looking at the plans it appears that the project does not provide aerial fire apparatus access for a building that is over 30
feet tall.
Regards,
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Michael Cameron
Fire Inspector
Email: mcame@cccfpd.org
Phone: (925)941-3300 Ext 1548
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
4005 Port Chicago Hwy, Suite 250
Concord, CA 94520
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
To help protect your privacy, Micro so ft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.www.cccfpd.org
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged and/or confidential information only
for use by the intended recipients. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive messages for the addressee),
you may not use, copy, disclose, or distribute this message (or any information contained in or attached to it) to anyone.
You may be subject to civil action and/or criminal penalties for violation of this restriction. If you received this transmission
in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail or by telephone and delete the transmission. Thank you.
310
1
Everett Louie
From:Jesse Ma <jsswma@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, July 23, 2023 1:43 PM
To:Everett Louie
Subject:Windhover Terrace Apartments
Good afternoon Everett,
I am one of the owners of a townhome adjacent to this development and have received the notice of public review for
the MND.
It appears the purpose for this notice is only for the review and approval of the environmental impacts and not the site
plan itself. While I have no issues with the MND, I do have some concerns regarding the site plan and proposed
variances.
Listed below are some of the items I noticed when reviewing the site plan which I'm sure the project civil engineer
should be aware of but I just wanted to point out coming from someone who works in land development:
1. Building height:
There's a variance proposal to increase the building heights from the maximum of 30'. I know a lot of my
neighbors have concerns regarding the blocking of natural light, especially since our development already sits
lower than the proposed building. From an engineering standpoint, the main issue I see and need clarification
on is how will the site address the required fire department aerial access with roads less than 26' wide? In
addition, the fire turnaround doesn't seem adequate for the site because the dead end drive aisle is greater
than 150' from the fire turnaround. In addition, the hose pull wouldn't reach the southern eastern corner of
the building.
2. overland and release:
Based on the project description, the site drains from west to east with a 9' differential. There seems to be stormwater
quality measures through out the site with a big basin in the rear. How does the site tackle the highflow storm events
without potentially releasing any runoff off into my townhome development? Based on the natural topography the
runoff will run on to our site.
3. Parking and site accessibility:
While I haven't seen the complete set of plans, it appears the proposed project provides EV and ADA stalls. It would
appear this site would fall under CBC 11B which requires one of the EV stalls to be Van accessibly. Based on the site plan,
it's not clear if this condition is satisfied. In addition, per the latest iteration of the code, EV and ada stalled need to be
provided for separate facilities (i.e. cover and uncovered stalls both need to have ADA and EV stalls), they shouldn't only
be in the covered carports. For the site accessibility, it's not clear if there's a path provided to Windhover Way which I
believe should be required.
Not sure if you would be the right person to reach out to for these site concerns as I know the public hearing is
really for the environmental impacts. But as an owner of one of the adjacent propertys, I wanted to voice out
my concerns: mainly with the building heights and stormwater overland and release as mentioned above.
Let me know your thoughts, thanks
Jesse Ma
311
312
1
Everett Louie
From:Kevin Mulcahy <kvnmlch@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, July 26, 2023 3:06 PM
To:Everett Louie
Subject:Appeal of Windhover Terrace Apartments, CC File #CDDP21-03031
Dear Planning Department and Whoever It May Concern;
I strongly agree with our neighborhood that the proposed 24 unit, 3‐story apartment project on Windhover Way will
become a huge detriment.
It will loom over existing homes, crowd out parking and make traffic and life miserable for everyone, especially those
new renters who must jam into these clustered boxes.
A quick survey of other high density apartments nearby shows how excessive this project is;
3570 Pacheco Blvd. ‐‐‐ .66 Acre ‐‐‐ 11 Units ‐‐‐ 850 s.f. each ‐‐1 story ‐‐‐ 24 parking/ full size spaces
3910 Pacheco Blvd. ‐‐‐ .53 Acre ‐‐‐ 12 Units ‐‐‐ 650 s.f. each ‐‐1 story ‐‐‐ 22 parking plus street
3911 Pacheco Blvd. ‐‐‐ .65 Acre ‐‐‐ 12 Units ‐‐‐ 1030 s.f. each ‐‐2 story ‐‐‐ 18 parking plus covered
28 Camino Del Sol ‐‐‐ .53 Acre ‐‐‐ 10 Units ‐‐‐ 660 s.f. each ‐‐1 story ‐‐‐ 20 parking plus street
45 Camino Del Sol ‐‐‐ .43 acre ‐‐‐ 9 units ‐‐‐ 670 s.f. each ‐‐‐ 1&2 story ‐‐ 23 parking
4035 Pacheco Blvd ‐‐‐ .39 acre ‐‐‐ 14 units ‐‐‐ 560 s.f. each ‐‐‐ 2 story ‐‐ 28 parking
313
1
Everett Louie
From:Kevin Mulcahy <kvnmlch@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, July 30, 2023 10:17 PM
To:Everett Louie
Subject:Appeal of Windhover Terrace Apartments, CC File #CDDP21-03031
To: Mr. Everett Louie, CCC Planning and Appeal Board Members;
Apologies for an earlier email which I accidentally sent before finishing.
In my previous post I listed neighboring multi‐unit complexes in order to compare them to this one.
Almost all are one story, have much smaller, one‐bedroom units, and have at least one and usually two full sized parking
stalls per unit.
As proposed, Windhover Terrace will have THREE (3) stories, 24 Units with 36 Bedrooms total, and only 28 assigned or
open (non H/C or car‐charger) spaces, most of which are compromised in size. If "Bonus" variances are added for
height, drive aisle widths and lot coverage you have to wonder where work trucks and delivery drivers park and turn
around. They too will be looking for Item #8 on sheet C1.0, "Proposed Dead End Turnaround."
To be consistent with local multi‐unit sites this project should be no higher than 2‐stories, no more than twelve units of
600 s.f. each, with two (2) parking spots per unit. If compared with all the homes beyond on Windhover Way and
Cormorant Ct. the density is 30 homes on ten times the area, with each house having parking for 2 covered. 2‐3 on
apron, and several more on the street. As for height, I feel for immediate neighbors. Can you imagine coming out
your back door, or even worse your front such as at Pineview Townhomes, and look up at a building the size of a cruise
ship looking down on you? Clearly this development is out of place for this area. No mitigations can lessen its overall
impact.
Regarding any potential County liability under SB‐10 and developer litigation, I believe the County and ALL local
governments need to resist sweeping mandates from remote State, Federal, and even Global governing bodies. Local
governments need to protect their citizens; Populations have no other barriers to high‐level over‐reach. It may SEEM
like the moral high ground is more high density housing and less accommodation for cars, but not if it degrades existing
quality of life. The County should just be consistent with past standards and not encourage pack 'n' stack housing. It is a
race to the bottom in quality of life for all, especially for the people who move into those new crowded units.
Per SB‐10,Ch. 65915(e)(1)#1, the County need not waive or reduce development standards (def.65589.5(d)(2)) if there is
a specific adverse impact. Combined with the points made by my neighbors this project has so many adverse impacts it
is hard to single them out.
Thank you for the chance to comment.
Kevin Mulcahy
kvnmlch@gmail.com
70 cormorant Ct., Martinez, CA 94553
Cell; 925‐708‐2810
314
From: Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy
70 Cormorant Court
Martinez, CA 94553 925-708-1523
To: Everett Louie, Planner II
Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and Development
Dear Mr. Louie,
Attached are my Concerns Regarding Windhover Terrace Apartment Project
(Revised 7/26/23)
County File #CDDP21-03031
Variance on Number of Parking Spaces/Parking Ratios-Only 34 spaces are being proposed for this
project. If, as is estimated in the county development plan under the “Public Protection” section, the
population will increase by 89.28 people when these apartments are rented, 34 parking spaces will not
be adequate to accommodate all the vehicles that will need parking even if only half that number of
people owns vehicles. If the parking plan is allowed to pass as is proposed, the extra traffic and parked
cars will spill out onto Windhover Way and the adjacent courts which are already overly impacted by
parked cars, trucks, and work vehicles. Public transit is not a viable option in this area right now (see
current bus schedule for Pacheco Blvd.) so we must assume that most of the apartment residents will be
relying on automobiles and trucks for their transportation needs. There are no spaces allowed in this
plan for visitor parking. Spaces for disabled parking, car charging and visitor parking should not be
included in the total number of proposed parking spaces as they are now. This leaves even less available
parking for those who live in the apartment buildings but do not fit into these categories. Please visit
the site early mornings, evenings or on weekends to see first-hand the impact this will have on the
neighborhood and to see for yourselves that parking on Windhover Way and the adjacent courts is
already at maximum capacity.
Variance on Parking Stall Sizes-Compact spaces do not work for most modern vehicles. These units
need full legal sized parking spaces. Tenants as well as delivery drivers have large pickups, SUVs and
vans that need room to park and maneuver. Larger vehicle owners will have no choice but to park on
the street. Please be realistic when planning for vehicle parking.
315
Variance on Building Height-The current proposal for a 24-unit three story apartment building conflicts
with the surrounding buildings in mass and height even though the county development plan claims that
it does not. There are no three-story apartment buildings or projects this large or tall in the surrounding
area. Neighbors living in the single-family homes adjacent to the project will be negatively impacted by
the tall apartment building overshadowing their back yards. Not only will the noise level increase but
the privacy of their back yards will be eliminated. Additionally, views and sunlight will be impeded.
Variance on Unit Density-The project approved previously in 2020 was for 16 units. Adding the
additional 8 units adds extra burden to the neighborhood in traffic, parking, and noise levels. It is simply
too large to squeeze onto a .75-acre parcel. Why not build a project that can accommodate a smaller
number of residents but is suitable for this sized parcel and the neighborhood? Providing two
apartment units of “affordable housing” should not be reason enough to allow the addition of 8 extra
“market rate” apartments. Doing so will clearly make the project too large to be placed onto such a
small parcel. Please be realistic and plan a more suitable project for the size of the lot and one that is
appropriate for this neighborhood.
Increase in Traffic-During peak traffic times, (morning commute, school start times, midday, after
school, evening commute as well as the current extra traffic due to refinery change-over) it is already
difficult to exit Windhover Way onto Pacheco Blvd. Jumping into the center lane on Pacheco Blvd. is
often the only alternative for getting out and is dangerous. Adding this many vehicles to the current
traffic level will only make it harder to exit. Please consider a traffic light at Windhover Way and
Pacheco Boulevard when deciding on this project. Perhaps you might also consider an alternative or
additional exit from the project besides the one on Windhover Way in consideration of safety. Again,
please visit the site to observe the traffic flow at peak times so that you have a clear understanding of
what current residents are experiencing.
Trucked in Soil-Over the past few years owners of this site have trucked in soil from an unknown origin
to raise the level of this lot by quite a bit. This is of concern to many of us living nearby as we are not
sure where the soil originated from, if it might be contaminated in some way, why they felt the need to
raise the lot level and if they even had permission to do so. Hopefully, you can shed some light on this
issue and assure us that they had permits to dump this (possibly contaminated) soil near our homes.
In general, this project needs a redesign with fewer and smaller units. Just because the zoning allows a
certain number of units does not mean that it is a good design for this parcel or for the surrounding
community. Tennant and neighborhood quality of life should count here, too. Please consider a
redesign of this project on a much smaller scale.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Charlene Crisafulli-Mulcahy
70 Cormorant Court
Martinez, CA 925-708-1523
316
CDDP21-03031
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 Photo
City Limits
Streets
Building Outlines
Assessment Parcels
World Imagery
Low Resolution 15m Imagery
High Resolution 60cm Imagery
High Resolution 30cm Imagery
Citations
317
CDDP21-03031
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.
General Plan: Multi-Family Residential, High-Density (MH)
City Limits
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)
WA (Water)
WS (Watershed)
Streets 318
DP21-3031DP16-3009
TR7246
DP88-3044
DP89-3036
2041-RZ
MS88-0115
319
CDDP21-03031
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.
Zoning: Multi-Family Residential (M-29)
City Limits
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)
A-3, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation)
A-3 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District)
A-3, -FH -SG (Flood Hazard and Solar Energy Generation)320
Department of Conservation and Development
County Zoning Administrator
Monday, January 23, 2023 – 1:30 P.M.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____
Project Title:
Development Plan for Windhover Terrace Apartments
County File Number:
CDDP21-03031
Applicant: West Coast Land and Development, Inc. – Pamela West
Owner:
West Coast Land and Development, Inc.
Zoning/General Plan:
Multiple Family Residential (M-29) / Multiple-Family Residential –
High Density (MH)
Site Address/Location: North of Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd. Intersection, Martinez
CA 94553 (APN: 380-220-066)
California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Status:
The Project is statutorily exempt from CEQA under Public Resources
Code Section §21159.25
Project Planner: Everett Louie, Planner II – Phone: (925) 655-2873
Email: everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us
Staff Recommendation: Approve (See section II for full recommendation)
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
The applicant requests approval of a Development Plan to construct an approximately
22,247-square-foot 24-unit apartment building and covered carports, and to install
associated improvements (e.g. pavement, utilities, stormwater conveyance) on a vacant
property. The project includes a Tree Permit for the removal of approximately seven code
protected trees and a Variance request for a proposed 38’-6” height (where 30’ is the
maximum) and a 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum). The project includes
two units for low-income households and one unit for very low-income households and is
requesting a Density Bonus of 2 units for a total of 24 units and is requesting a concession
to reduce the Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%. The applicant is requesting
reduction in development standards pursuant to Government Code 65915(p) for parking
321
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 2 of 15
ratios and 65915(e) for reduced parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of
covered parking spaces. The project includes approximately seven cubic yards of cut and
3,803 cubic yards of fill. The project requests an exception to Division 914, Collect and
Convey requirements.
II. RECOMMENDATION
A. FIND that the project is statutorily exempt from CEQA under Public Resources Code
Section §21159.25
B. APPROVE the Development Plan County File #CDDP21-03031 which includes a
Variance Permit, Tree Permit and Density Bonus Request, based on the attached
findings and conditions of approval;
C. APPROVE the exception from the “collect and convey” requirements of the County
Ordinance Code by ADOPTING the attached findings and conditions of approval;
D. DIRECT staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.
III. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. General Plan: The subject property is located within the Multiple-Family Residential –
High Density (MH) General Plan land use designation.
B. Zoning: The subject property is located within the M-29 Multiple Family Residential (M-
29) District.
C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance: The proposed project is
statutorily exempt from CEQA under Public Resources Code Section §21159.25 –
residential or mixed-use housing projects that are within an unincorporated area of a
County. This exemption applies to multifamily residential housing projects that are
consistent with the applicable General Plan Designation and Policies, and applicable
Zoning designation and regulations and that are located on parcels no more than five
acres. A project can qualify for this statutorily exemption as long as two-thirds of the
square footage of the development is designated for residential use and if the project is
greater than 6 dwelling units per acre. The proposed project is a 22,247-square-foot
building. 100% of the building will be used for residential use which exceeds the two-
thirds requirement. All development will either be incidental or primary to residential
uses. The project site does not exceed five acres of size and proposing 24 units and is
located within the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County. Therefore, the project
qualifies under Public Resources Code Section §21159.25.
D. Lot Creation: The project site is Parcel C of Parcel Map 143PM48, recorded December 5,
1989 and approved under County File #CDMS88-0115.
322
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 3 of 15
E. Previous Applications:
CDDP16-3009: A Development Plan to construct a 14,124-square-foot 16-unit
apartment building. The project was approved by the Zoning Administrator on June 1,
2020, but was subsequently withdrawn.
CDSD88-7246: A Condominium Subdivision for an 18-unit condominium project was
approved by the Planning Commission on July 11, 1989. The 18-unit development was
previously approved under County File #CDDP88-3044. Following multiple extensions,
the tentative map expired on July 11, 1998.
CDDP88-3044: A Development Plan to construct 18 residential units in two three-story
buildings (17,730-square-feet gross floor area). The project was approved by the Zoning
Administrator on April 3, 1989. The approved development was never constructed.
CDMS88-0115: The project included a three-lot minor subdivision which established the
subject property and the two adjacent properties to the south. This was approved by the
Zoning Administrator on April 3, 1989.
IV. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION
Site Description: The subject lot is approximately 0.77-acres in size (approximately 32,820
square feet) rectangular shaped parcel (with the addition of a 52’ x 70’ strip which extends
to the west and connects the parcel to Windhover Way as an access.) The parcel is located
on the west side of Windhover Way, approximately 125 feet north of the Pacheco Boulevard
and Windhover Way intersection in the in the Pacheco/Vine Hill area. The parcel is vacant
and is largely covered with grass and dirt and has eight trees located around the perimeter
of the parcel. There is existing curb, sidewalk, streetlights, and underground utilities along
the frontage of Windhover Way. Public Works has reviewed the submittal and has indicated
that the applicant will not be required to perform further widening or frontage
improvements. The general topographic slope of the parcel trends downward from west to
east. The elevation starts at 40 feet above mean sea level at Windhover Way and slopes
down to 31 feet above mean sea level at the rear of the property. The site currently has
access off of Windhover Way which will continue to remain as the access point. The site
contains eight trees consisting of London Plane, Carolina Cherry Laurel, California Black
Walnut, Glossy Pivet, Olive and Siberian Elm.
Surrounding Land Uses: This area along Windhover Way is exclusively occupied by
residential development. The adjacent parcels to the north and south host single family
residences. To the east of the site is a 13-unit townhouse development. The two properties
to the west both host duplexes. Approximately 316 feet northeast is a 12-unit apartment
complex. Beyond the immediate neighborhood, along Pacheco Boulevard there are a variety
of residential, commercial, and retail uses including multi-family housing, restaurants,
schools, storage locations, gas stations, auto repair shops, and other retail services. Parcels
323
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 4 of 15
within the City of Martinez jurisdiction are located approximately 1,100 feet to the east of
the subject parcel.
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests approval of a Development Plan to construct a three-story, 38’-6”
tall, 24-unit apartment building. The unit breakdown for the apartment building is provided
on the table below.
Proposed Dwelling Unit Summary
Floor Type of Apartment Number of Units Average Unit Size
(gross rentable
square feet)
Building 1st
Floor
Two-bedroom unit
One-bedroom unit
4
4
650
830
Building 2nd
Floor
Two-bedroom unit
One-bedroom unit
4
4
650
830
Building 3rd
Floor
Two-bedroom unit
One-bedroom unit
4
4
650
830
Total 24 22,247 square feet
Building Design and Height
The three-story apartment building will have a modern design with a flat roof with stucco
siding in a sandstone color blended in with hard shingle siding in a pearl gray color around
the proposed balconies. Window trim will be vinyl style in a sand color. Each level has similar
floor plan layouts, with the two-bedroom units located on the outer portions of the building
and the one-bedroom units located within the interior of the floor. The building would be
comprised of three segments separated by staircase breezeways, joined under one unified
flat roof to minimize the overall bulk of the structure. Building design incorporates a
rectangular shape with all exterior walls of each level at the same location to create one
cohesive building from top to bottom while the open breezeway at each level adds depth
and variation to the exterior of the building. The overall height of the building will be 38’-6”
from natural grade and will appear to be 34’ from finished grade.
The project also includes various other improvements including:
• Parking related improvements for 34 parking spaces with two ADA accessible spaces
and four electric vehicle charging spaces.
• Asphalt and permeable pavement.
• Landscaping would include 25 trees and numerous shrubs throughout the property
for a total of 6,600 square feet of landscaping. A new six-foot fence along the rear
property line and a six-foot decorative wall along the side property lines.
324
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 5 of 15
• Retaining walls along the rear of the property
• Fire Hydrant
• Six long-term bicycle storage lockers and two short-term bicycle storage spaces.
• A 13’-7” tall carport that will cover 16 spaces located on the east side of the parcel.
• A 8’-8”, Approx. 261 square foot trash enclosure structure.
• Four downward-oriented LED streetlight-style light to be located near the carport to
provide site security.
• Bioretention Facilities.
• Site preparation would include approximately seven cubic yards of cut and 3,803
cubic yards of fill for bioretention treatment facilities and to direct stormwater to off-
site drainage infrastructure.
• Curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements and driveway ramp would be constructed along
the project frontage on Windhover Way.
Parking
In accordance with California Density Bonus Law, instead of utilizing the parking
requirements of the County Zoning Code, the applicant is providing parking in accordance
with Government Code Section 65915(p)(1), which states as follows:
Upon the request of the developer, no city, county, or city and county shall require a
vehicular ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, of a development meeting the
criteria of subdivision (b) that exceeds the following ratios:
Parking ratios pursuant to 65915(p)
1 Bedroom Units = 1 off-street parking space (where 1.5 spaces are required)
2 Bedroom Units = 1.5 off-street parking space (where 2 spaces are required)
The project will provide a total of 34 parking spaces consisting of 9’ x 17’, 9’ x 18’, 7.5’ x
14.5’ dimensions. These will include compact, accessible and electric vehicle. The project
proposes 17 parking spaces, (16 of which will be covered parking spaces) along the eastern
property line 13 parking spaces along the northern property line and four compact parking
spaces along the entrance. In addition, six long-term bicycle parking spaces and two short-
term bicycle parking spaces will be provided.
Density Bonus
In accordance with California Density Bonus Law, pursuant to Government Code Section
65915(b), the applicant seeks a density bonus for the project. The project would provide 3
affordable units or 13% of the units in the housing development. The project has a maximum
density of 22 units under the General Plan Land Use Designation (Multiple-Family Residential
High Density (MH). The inclusionary housing requirement is calculated as Fifteen percent of
22 units which yields 3.3 units. Since fifteen percent of the proposed units is 3.3 units, the
applicant has indicated that they will pay the full amount of the fractional (0.3) in-lieu fee.
325
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 6 of 15
Of the required 3.3 units of inclusionary housing required, one unit will need to be available
to very low-income families and two units to low-income families. The applicant has
indicated that they will comply with this requirement by providing one very low-income unit
and two low-income units. Therefore, the project would be eligible for the State density
bonus of 13.6 percent, and the total allowable unit count under the MH designation would
increase from 22 units to 24 units. By providing one unit to very low-income households,
the project is eligible for one development incentive or concession. County Code Section
84-26.14 requires twenty-five percent of the area to not be covered by building, structures,
or pavement, but shall be landscaped. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(e), the
applicant is requesting a reduction of this development standard to allow a 20.5% open
space area within the parcel.
The applicant has sought relief from the following County standards as provide for in Section
65915(p) and Section 65915(e) of the Government Code:
1) The applicant is providing a total of 34 off-street parking spaces. The parking spaces are
located along the north and east property lines and along the entrance to the property
from Windhover way. Pursuant to Government Code 65915(p), zero to one-bedroom
units shall have one (1) onsite parking space and two-bedroom units shall have one and
a half (1.5) onsite parking spaces. In accordance with this standard, the applicant will
need to provide 30 parking spaces (the applicant is proposing twelve (12) two-bedroom
units and twelve (12) one-bedroom units). The applicant is providing 34 parking spaces.
2) Pursuant to Government Code 65915(e), the applicant is requesting a reduction of
development standards to allow a reduced 2’ side yard setback (where 20’ minimum is
required) for parking spaces, a reduced 17.5’ front yard setback (where 25’ minimum is
required) for parking spaces, a reduced parking stall size to allow 9’ x 18 and 9’ x 17
parking stalls, (where 9’ x 19’ is required), and 16 covered parking where one-half of the
required spaces shall be covered.) The covered parking area is located along the eastern
property line of the site.
Circulation and Access
Primary vehicle access to the project site would be from Windhover Way via a driveway that
intersects parallel with Windhover Way and the subject parcel. Windhover Way connects to
Pacheco Boulevard. Both of these roads are County maintained roads. Windhover Way along
the project frontage is approximately 36-foot-wide street within a 56-foot right-of-way. The
driveway isle exiting Windhover Way and leading to the parking lot on site will be 26’ wide
and will lead into an emergency vehicle hammerhead turnaround. Within the parking lot,
the project site will maintain a 25’ parking isle width for the parking spaces along Windhover
Way and a 24.5’ parking aisle width for the parking spaces on the east (side) property line.
The project proposes to install retaining curbs along the edge of the driveway/parking lot
area.
VI. AGENCY COMMENTS
326
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 7 of 15
A. Contra Costa County, Building Inspection Division: In a returned agency comment packet
dated February 17, 2022, the Building Inspection Division stated that the layout of the
building must meet California Building Code chapter 11A. The applicant has since revised
the floor plan to meet this building requirement.
B. Contra Costa County, Advanced Planning: In an email dated November 16, 2021,
Advanced Planning stated that the project is consistent with the policies for the Vine
Hill/Pacheco Boulevard area.
C. Contra Costa County, Transportation Planning Section: In a letter dated June 28, 2022,
the Transportation Planning Section provided comments requiring the project to have
EV charging stations and to submit a TDM program prior to issuance of a building
permit. This requirement has been included in Findings and Conditions of Approval #34
and #35 for this project.
D. Contra Costa County, Housing & Community Improvement Division: In a letter dated
November 9. 2022, the Housing & Community Improvement Division required the
applicant to submit an inclusionary housing plan. The applicant submitted an
Inclusionary Housing Plan and a Density Bonus Proposal to which the Housing &
Community Development Division provided their final conditions of approval on
December 12, 2022. The comments are included in the Finding and Conditions of
Approval # 11- 20 for this project.
E. Contra Costa County, County Geologist: In a review letter dated November 19, 2021, the
County Geologist deemed the Geotechnical report sufficient and provided conditions of
approval. The recommended conditions of approval are included in Findings and
Conditions of Approval #29 - 33 for this project.
F. Contra Costa Environmental Health: At the time of this staff report, staff has not received
any comments from Contra Costa Environmental Health.
G. Contra Costa County, Public Works Department Engineering Services: The Public Works
Department provided a staff report dated December 19, 2022, which indicated that they
supported the exception request and provided their conditions of approval. The
recommended conditions of approval are included in the Findings and Conditions of
Approval #59 – 60 for this project.
H. Contra Costa County, Public Works Department Traffic: At the time of this staff report,
staff has not received any comments from Contra Costa Public Works Department Traffic.
I. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District: In a letter dated November 15, 2021, the
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District provided comments stating that the
building must meet the California Fire Code, California Building Code and California
Residential Code and that the applicant must submit improvement plans to the Fire
District for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. The applicant is
327
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 8 of 15
advised to contact the Fire District under the advisory notes of the Findings and
Conditions of Approval for this project.
J. Mountain View Sanitary District: In a letter dated November 17, 2021, the Sanitary
District provided comments stating that the applicant must submit improvement plans
to the Sanitary District for review and approval. The applicant is advised to contact the
Sanitary District under the advisory notes of the Findings and Conditions of Approval for
this project.
K. Contra Costa Water District: In a letter dated November 18, 2022, the Water District
provided their requirements for the proposed project.
L. City of Martinez: At the time of this staff report, staff has not received any comments
from the City of Martinez.
M. Martinez Unified School District: At the time of this staff report, staff has not received
any comments from the Martinez Unified School District.
N. Northwest Information Center (NWIC): In a letter dated November 22, 2021, the NWIC
provided comments stating there the site has a low possibility of containing unrecorded
archaeological site(s) and that a study is not required.
O. Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District: In a returned agency comment
request form received on November 10, 2021, the District indicated that the applicant is
to employ the necessary measures to ensure no creation of public nuisance.
VII. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. General Plan Consistency:
Density: The General Plan Land Use Designation for the project site is Multiple-Family
Residential High Density (MH). Within this designation, the General Plan allows for 22.0
to 29.9 multiple-family units per net acre. The table below demonstrates the project’s
compliance with the MH General Plan designation.
* Density Bonus Request pursuant to Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A)
Total Gross Area= 0.75 Acres
Total Net Area (80% of Gross) =
(The project has no streets, highways and public
rights-of-way – therefore gross acre is net)
0.75 Acres
0.6 Net Acres x
MH 22 to 29.9 Units Per Acre = Units Per Net Acre 16 to 22 units allowed
Proposed Development 24 units*
328
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 9 of 15
Thus, as proposed the multi-family project is consistent with the Contra Costa County
General Plan development guidelines for the MH land use designation. In addition to
projects having to comply with the General Plan Density, a project has to comply with
the General Plan Policies for development within the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard
Specific Geographic Area, as outlined below:
Policies For The Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard Area: The project site is located within
the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard area. As such, the following general plan policies for
this area are applicable to the project and the project is consistent with these policies.
• Policy 3-105: The scenic assets and unstable slopes of the Vine Hill Ridge are to be
protected for open space/agricultural use.
The proposed project is not located on or near Vine Hill Ridge. Therefore, the project
will not impact the open space/agricultural use of that area.
• Policy 3-106: The residential neighborhood east of I-680 shall be buffered from the
industrial/landfill-related uses.
The project parcel is located west of I-680, therefore this policy does not apply to
the project.
• Policy 3-107: Approximately 40 acres of land south of the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe tracks, between Morello and Pacheco, is designated Agricultural Lands, to
encourage the continued operation of the Viano family vineyards and winery.
The project parcel is not located within the land designated in the policy. The project
parcel is over 1,500 feet northeast of the Viano family vineyards and winery.
Therefore, the project will not conflict with this policy.
Based on the consistency with the applicable policies and land use designation
standards, the project would conform with the County’s General Plan.
B. Housing Element Compliance: A component of preparing the County’s Housing
Element for the General Plan is the identification of vacant and underutilized suits
suitable for residential development, and an evaluation of the housing development
potential of these sites in fulfilling the County’s share of the regional housing needs as
determined by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
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
329
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 10 of 15
Number 380-220-066 is 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.
Nevertheless, the project includes a total of 24 residential units. The project includes
one-bedroom and two-bedroom units. These unit types will increase housing
opportunities for different size households for different income categories. As previously
stated, this project maximizes the housing density and development of the site and
includes a density bonus of nine percent above the base unit density for the site.
Therefore, the project will contribute towards the regional housing need for the County
and provide needed housing units for the region.
C. Zoning Consistency: The subject property is within the M-29 Multiple Family Residential
(M-29) Zoning district. County Code 84-26.402 – Uses – Permitted (3) states that Multiple
family buildings, but not including motels or hotels, is permitted use. Therefore, the
proposed project is a permitted use within the M-29 Zoning. With the included variances
and concessions pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(e), the application is
consistent with the districts’ development standards and the County Zoning Ordinance.
The district’s zoning development standards dictate allowable development in the area.
The project would require two variances from these standards, building height and
reduced driveway aisle width and would utilize the Density Bonus Request to request a
concession to reduce the open space requirement and a reduction for parking stall size,
parking setback and total number of covered parking spaces. To build a structure of this
size to accommodate the density bonus request, variances and reduction to
development standards are required as stated below.
Required Proposed
Area 10,000 SF 32,830 SF
Building Height: Maximum 30 Feet
(20 Feet Within 50 Feet of SFR District)
38’-6”
(Building Not Within 50 Feet
of SFR District)
(34’ from Finished Grade)
Front Setback: Minimum 25 Feet 17.5’ for parking spaces**
Approx. 71’ for building
Side Setback: Minimum 20 Feet 3.8’ for parking spaces**
20’ for building
Rear Setback: Minimum 20 Feet 21.4’
Unit Density 22 Units allowed 24 Units^
Parking Spaces:
Government Code 65915(p)
1 Bedroom Units = 1 off-street parking
2 Bedroom Units = 2 off-street parking
Total = 30 off-street parking
34 Spaces**
330
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 11 of 15
*Variance Request **Government Code 65915 ^Density Bonus Request #Incentive/Concessions
The variance request for increased building height and parking aisle width would be
consistent with the intent of the zoning district and are necessary given the project site’s
constraints. The variance for building height is a result of the necessary lot padding that
is required for drainage to be directed to Windhover Way as the lot is lower by almost 6
feet at the rear of the property. The added fill raises the height of the building from 34’
to 38’-6”. The reduced parking isle widths allows for the project allow the project to have
more parking spaces and an isle for vehicles to navigate. The reduction in parking isle
space allows for more maneuverability and to accommodate additional parking spaces.
With the project proposing to meet the minimum landscape coverage, the driveway isle
space had to be reduced to accommodate this feature. With just a small reduction in the
driveway isle width, the project can provide more parking spaces and landscape area.
D. Appropriateness of Use: The proposed 22,247-square-foot, three-story, 24-unit
apartment building, and associated improvements (e.g. pavement, utilities, carport,
etc.) would be appropriate for the residential area. The new residential development
would be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood along Windhover Way, which
is comprised of single- and multi-family residential development. The project would
both continue the residential development pattern in the immediate vicinity, and the
infill development would create updated housing stock in the neighborhood.
Furthermore, the project layout and access would provide for reasonable development
with no significant or adverse effects to the surrounding community or environment.
The applicant has submitted a Transportation Impact Analysis report prepared by W-
Trans which concluded that the project would have a less than significant impact to
existing traffic levels. Thus, the proposed use would be appropriate and harmonious
with the area.
E. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance: The project is subject to the Chapter 822-4.
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Pursuant to Section 822-4.402 of the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance, a residential development of five or more units shall require at least
fifteen precent of the rental units to be developed and sold as inclusionary units. The
Covered Parking: 24
(50% of Required Parking Spaces)
16**
Bike Parking
Long Term
Short Term
15% of Number of Bedrooms
15% x 36 Rooms = 6
5% of Number of Bedrooms
5% x 36 Rooms = 2
6 Long Term
2 Short Term
Lot Coverage: 35% Maximum Per Building
(11,490 SF)
10,619 SF
Open Area: 25% Minimum 20.5%#
Landscape
Coverage:
Minimum 6,100
(75% of Open Area)
6,600 SF
331
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 12 of 15
applicant is therefore required to construct 3.3 inclusionary housing units for the project.
An Inclusionary Housing Plan was received on December 20, 2022, which proposed to
construct three inclusionary units. Of the affordable units, two 830 square-foot units will
be available to “lower-income households”, and one 650 square-foot unit will be
available to a “very low-income household.” The fractional unit would be satisfied with
paying a partial in-lieu fee of $47,917.09. This fee is included as condition of approval
#13 in the conditions of approval for this project.
F. Parking: The project will provide a total of 34 parking spaces consisting of 9’ x 17’, 9’ x
18’, 7.5’ x 14.5’ dimensions. These will include compact, accessible and electric vehicle.
The project proposes 17 parking spaces, (16 of which will be covered parking spaces)
along the eastern property line 13 parking spaces along the northern property line and
four compact parking spaces along the entrance. As part of the applicant’s Density Bonus
request, which is discussed in this Staff Report, the applicant is requesting parking ratios
pursuant to Government Code 69515(p). Pursuant to Government Code 65915(p),
Upon the request of the developer, no city, county, or city and count shall require
a vehicular ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, of a development
meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) that exceeds the following ratios:
(A) Zero to one bedrooms: 1 off-street parking space
(B) Two to three bedrooms: 1.5 off-street parking space
Based on the number of bedrooms proposed, 30 parking spaces would be required for
the project. Thus, the project proposes 34 parking spaces, which meets this requirement.
County Code 82-16.412- Bicycle Parking requires long-term and short-term bicycle
parking to be provided. Multiple-family dwelling projects must provide the following:
(A) Long Term – Spaces for 15 percent of the number of bedrooms, or two spaces,
whichever is greater. 15% x 36 Rooms = 6
(B) Short Term- Spaces for five percent of the number of bedrooms, or two spaces,
whichever is greater. 5% x 36 Rooms = 2
Based on the number of bedrooms proposed, the project would be required to provide
six long-term bicycle parking and two short-term bicycle parking. The project has indicated
that they will provide a bicycle locker that will allow for six bicycles to be stored and will
provide a bike rack that will allow for two bicycles to be stored. Thus, the project proposes
8 total bicycle parking spaces, which meets this requirement.
G. Trees: There are eight trees evaluated on the property, representing five different
species. The existing trees are located along property boundaries. Eight trees are
proposed to be removed to make room for site improvements. A condition of approval
(COA # 26) will require a replanting of 13 trees, 24-inch boxed trees and a restitution for
these replanted trees. The contingency bond will ensure that the applicant installs the
332
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 13 of 15
trees according to the approved landscaping plan on sheet L-1. A final landscape plan
will be required and the landscaping for the project will be required to comply with the
County’s Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance.
H. Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance: 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 23,790 square feet of impervious surface
therefore a stormwater control plan is required. The applicant has provided a Preliminary
Stormwater Control Plan, dated February 2022, which has been deemed preliminarily
complete. However, 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.
Provision C.10, Trash Load Reduction, of the County’s NPDES Permit requires control of
trash in local waterways. To prevent or remove trash loads from municipal storm drain
systems, trash capture devices shall be installed in catch basins (excludes those located
within a bioretention/stormwater treatment facility). The devices must meet the
County’s NPDES Permit and be approved by Public Works Department. Additionally, the
location must be approved by Public Works Department.
I. 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 waters to an adequate natural watercourse.
The property slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner, away and
considerably below street grade. Stormwater runoff from the site will be captured into
the bioretention facility onsite which discharges to an existing 18” storm drain in
Windhover Way, effectively diverting the onsite flows. Section 914-2.004 of the County
Ordinance prohibits the diversion of surface waters from any development. The applicant
has requested an exception from the Advisory Agency (Contra Costa County Public
Works Department) per section 92-6.002 of the County Ordinance Code. The Public
Works Department reviewed the proposed project and is not opposed to granting the
applicant an exception from the collect and convey requirements of the County
Ordinance Code. If the off-site conveyance system, ultimate drainage facility or natural
watercourse to which stormwater is proposed to be diverted is inadequate, the applicant
shall be responsible for all costs related to the construction and/or right-of-way
acquisition related to any necessary improvements to make the system adequate.
J. Traffic and Circulation: Primary vehicle access to the project site would be from
Windhover Way via a driveway that intersects parallelly with Windhover Way and the
333
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 14 of 15
subject parcel. The subject site fronts Windhover Way, which connects to Pacheco
Boulevard, both are County maintained roads. Windhover Way along the project
frontage is approximately 36-foot-wide street within a 56-foot right-of-way. There is
existing curb, sidewalk, streetlights, and underground utilities along the frontage. No
further widening or frontage improvements are necessary with this development.
Based on the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA), the proposed project will not impact
the Pacheco Blvd and Windhover Way as the report concluded that the intersection is
expected to continue operation at the same Levels of Service with and without the
project. The study also reviewed the projects potential generation of Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT). According to the Contra Costa County Travel Demand Model estimates,
the Countywide home-based average VMT per resident is 19.4 miles. Concurring with
guidance provided in the TIA, a project located anywhere in the County which generates
a VMT that is 15% or more below this value, or 16.5 miles per resident, should be
expected to have very little VMT impact and would not require further VMT analysis. The
TIA Table 4 states that the project VMT rate would be 16.0. Therefore, the project is
expected to have a VMT per capita less than 15% below the countywide VMT per
resident and no further VMT analysis is required. The Transportation Planning Section of
the Department of Conservation and Development reviewed the TIA and determined
that it was sufficient. Conditions of approval as recommended by the Transportation
Planning Section are included as condition of approval #34 in the Findings and
Conditions of approval for this project.
K. Lighting District Annexation: The subject parcel is already annexed into the L-100
lighting district and will require no further annexation.
L. Area of Benefit Fee: The applicant will need to comply with the requirements of the
Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Martinez Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the
Board of Supervisors. The fee shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits.
M. Drainage Area Fee and Creek Mitigation: The applicant will be required to comply with
the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 57, as adopted by the Board of
Supervisors. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.
N. Variance/Exceptions: The applicant is seeking a request for the following variances:
• A 38’-6” building height (where 30’ is the maximum allowed) pursuant to County
Code Section 84-26.803.
• A reduced driveway aisle width of 24.5’ (where 25’ is the minimum required) pursuant
to County Code Section 82-16.404(2).
The applicant is also requesting an exception to Division 914 of the County Ordinance
which requires 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
334
ZA – January 23, 2023
County File #CDDP21-03031
Page 15 of 15
existing adequate public storm drainage system which conveys the storm waters to an
adequate natural watercourse. Findings to support approval of the variance requests
and exceptions are discussed in the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval.
VIII. CONCLUSION
The proposed project is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan,
and also with the intent of the MH General Plan designation and the M-29 Zoning District.
The project is consistent with the established area as muti-family residential units are a
common occurrence. The design and use of the proposed apartments is consistent with the
other uses in the immediate area. The project will also provide additional needed housing
and affordable housing units. Therefore, Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator
approved County File #CDDP21-03031, based on the attached findings and subject to the
attached conditions of approval.
Attachments:
1. Findings and Conditions of Approval
2. Maps
3. Agency Comments
4. Special Reports
5. Plans
335
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031; WEST
COAST LAND AND DEVELOPMENT, INC – PAMELA WEST (APPLICANT & OWNER).
I. FINDINGS
A. Growth Management Performance Standards
1. Traffic: Policy 4-c under Growth Management Program (GMP) requires a traffic impact
analysis be conducted for any project that is estimated to generate 100 or more AM or
PM peak-hour trips based upon the trip generation rates as presented in the Institute of
Traffic Engineers (ITE). A project generating less than 100 peak-hour trips generally will
not create or exacerbate any current traffic problems. The project provided a
Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by W-Trans which concluded that the project
would generate 10 AM trips and 12 PM trips. Since the proposed development would
yield less than 100 peak-hour AM or PM trips, a project-specific traffic impact analysis is
not required and the project is assumed to have a less than significant impact on the
circulation system in the project vicinity.
2. Water: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate water
quantity can be provided. The subject property currently receives water service from the
Contra Costa Water District (CCWD), and the district has stated that water service is
available for the project as the entire site is within the water districts service area.
3. Sanitary Sewer: The GMP requires new development to demonstrate that adequate
sanitary sewer service is available. The project site currently receives sanitary sewer
service from the Mountain View Sanitary District (MVSD) and MVSD sewer mains in the
area are available for the project. The district provided a letter stating that the applicant
shall submit a sewer permit application with the district for review and approval.
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
district, or requires that an automatic fire sprinkler system be installed to satisfy this
standard. The project site is within the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
jurisdiction and is located approximately six mins drive time from Contra Costa County
Fire Station #14 located at 521 Jones Street in Martinez. The project is required to
comply with the applicable provisions of the California Fire Code, the California
Residential Code, and Contra Costa County Ordinances that pertain to emergency
access, fire suppression systems, and fire detection/warning systems. When it comes
time to submit for building permits, the construction drawings would have to be
reviewed and approved by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District.
5. Public Protection: Public protection standards under the GMP require that a Sheriff
Facility standard of 155 square feet of station area and support facilities per 1,000 in
336
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 2
population shall be maintained within the unincorporated area of the County. Based on
the United States Census Bureau’s estimate of 2.48 persons per household (between
2017-2021) for Martinez, the project would potentially increase the population by an
estimated 89.28 people. Since the project would result in a relatively small change in
population, the project would not impact the County’s ability to maintain a Sheriff facility
standard of 155 square feet of station area and support facilities per 1,000 members of
the population. Thus, the project would not significantly affect the provision of police
services to the Martinez area.
6. Parks and Recreation: As the project will add to the County’s population, Condition of
Approval (COA) #21 and #22 requires the project proponent to pay applicable Park
Impact and Park Dedication in-lieu fees for the new units. 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 located in Zone X, as designated on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps. 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. With the included
exception to Title 9, 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.
B. Development Plan Findings
1. Required Finding: The proposed project is consistent with the purpose of the
zoning district:
Project Finding: The purpose of the M-29 Multiple Family Residential (M-29) district is
to allow for multiple-family residential district development designed to provide as much
compatibility as possible with nearby single-family residential zoning. The project will
largely conform to the M-29 District development standards relating to setbacks, lot
coverage, and other standards. Variances to the development standards meet the intent
of the standards, as required by the Variance findings. The project also has submitted a
Density Bonus Request and is requesting parking ratios pursuant to Government Code
65915(p) and multiple reduction to development pursuant to Government Code
337
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 3
65915(e). With these requests, the proposed project creates a multi-family apartment
complex that is a permitted use under 84-26.402(3).
2. Required Finding: The proposed project is architecturally compatible with other
uses in the vicinity, both inside and outside the zoning district.
Project Finding: Given the density of housing development in the area (townhomes,
duplexes, single-family residence), the proposed design does not conflict with the
surroundings in building mass or height. The architectural style in this area of the County
can be described as a diverse collection of Ranch, Mediterranean, Spanish Revival, and
contemporary modern styles. The projects contemporary design would be comprised of
three segments separated by staircase breezeways, joined under one unified flat roof to
minimize the overall bulk of the structure. Building design incorporates a rectangular
shape with all exterior walls of each level at the same location to create one cohesive
building from top to bottom while the open breezeway at each level adds depth and
variation to the exterior of the building. The façade of the building will have variation
with sandstone color stucco alternating with pearl gray shingle siding.
C. Variance Findings:
1. Required Finding: Any variance authorized shall not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and
the respective land use district in which the subject property is located.
Project Finding (Height): The applicant requests a variance to allow a 38’-6” tall
building (where 30 feet is the maximum allowed). Given that the height is due to unique
topographical characteristics and drainage restrictions, granting of the variance for the
building height would not be considered a grant of special privilege. In order to meet
drainage requirements that require stormwater to drain to adequate stormwater
infrastructure at Windhover Way, the rear of the lot must be padded. Currently, the rear
of the lot is almost nine feet lower than the frontage (Windhover Way). The project will
pad almost nine feet towards the rear to bring the site level and 4’-6” of padding under
the building itself. This extensive amount of padding raises the finished grade under the
rear of the building, resulting in a height that exceeds the 30-foot standard if measured
from natural grade. Additionally, in order to meet the required density of the General
Plan Land Use Designation for this site, the project was required to add more units,
which prompted the height increase. Strict application of the zoning code would reduce
the amount of units on site by eight, which would result in a total of 16 units which
would be at the low end for the General Plan Land Use Designation. For these reasons,
the height of the building is not a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations of other properties in the vicinity and respective land use district.
338
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 4
Project Finding (Driveway Aisle Width):
The applicant requests a variance to allow for a 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is
the minimum required) for driveway aisles with parking of ninety degrees. Granting of
the variance for the reduced driveway aisle width would not be a grant of special
privilege. The irregular flag-shaped property has an approximately 48 foot-wide by 72
foot-long of strip of land that extends access to Windhover way. The strip of land
presents a unique restriction only applicable to this site. The unique shape unreasonable
limits development on the property in a way that requires the driveway aisle widths to be
slightly reduced in order to maintain circulation and parking spaces. The shape of the lot
limits reasonable development on the property. A reduction to the driveway aisle width
is necessary to allow for the amount of parking spaces and site improvements.
Otherwise, the project would not be feasible. For these reasons, the reduced driveway
aisle width is not a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other
properties in the vicinity and respective land use district.
2. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property because of its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict
application of the respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject
property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the
identical land use district.
Project Finding (Height): Given that the additional height is due to unique
topographical characteristics and drainage restrictions, granting of the variance for the
building height is based on special circumstances. In order to meet drainage
requirements that require stormwater to drain to adequate stormwater infrastructure at
Windhover Way, the rear of the lot must be padded. The padding ranges from
approximately 9 feet at the rear property line to 4’-6” underneath the building. Given
that the site slopes away from Windhover Way, the building is required to be raised to
address drainage issues. Thus, due to these special circumstances, the strict application
of zoning regulations would deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by other
properties developed as multiple-family projects.
Project Finding (Driveway Aisle Width): The applicant requests a variance to allow a
24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the required minimum). The irregular flag-shaped
property has a 48 food-wide by 72-foot-long strip of land that extends access to
Windhover way. This unique shape limits the placement and development of a driveway
aisle width on the property as there are already numerous other constraints. To provide a
driveway aisle for parking spaces to be accessed, the only feasible location is between
the proposed parking spaces. The flagged driveway results in additional area on the lot
that must be paved in order to reach the larger developable portion of the lot. Thus, a
25’ driveway aisle would not be feasible while also providing parking, open space,
339
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 5
covered parking and space for the building. Thus, due to these special circumstances, the
strict application of the zoning regulations would deprive the subject property of rights
enjoyed by other properties developed as multiple-family projects.
3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall substantially meet the intent
and purpose of the respective land use district in which the subject property is
located.
Project Finding: Height limits are applied to provide an orderly residential development
pattern and, adequate air and light between neighboring development. The 8’-6” of
additional height (4’ if measured from finished grade) would substantially meet the
intent and purpose of the respective 30-foot height maximum as all building setbacks
are met and exceeded. The building would maintain separation from neighboring
properties. The variance request will allow for the project to address drainage and
topography issues without burdening the applicant. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe
that the height would not have a detrimental effect on the adjoining properties and
meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.
Project Finding (Driveway Aisle Width): The applicant requests a variance to allow a
reduced 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required). The driveway
aisle width allows for cars to maneuver in and out of parking spaces. The proposed
driveway aisle width is only 0.5’ less than the minimum requirement. Due to site
constraints, the project has balanced the need to provide the full driveway aisle width
with the need to provide for adequate parking spots and landscaping requirements. The
loss of 0.5’ les for a driveway aisle width will not have a detrimental effect on the
adjoining properties and meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.
4. Findings for Granting an Exception Per Section 92-6.002:
Request for an exception from Title 9 Offsite Collect and Convey Diversion
requirements (Section 914-2.0040)
1. Required Finding: That there are unusual circumstances or conditions affecting the
property.
Project Finding: The property slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner,
away and considerably below street grade. There is no storm drain or easement at the
lowest corner of the site. On-site drainage facilities will be installed to tie into the
existing storm drain on Windhover Way to the west. The storm drain is deep enough to
allow for gravity drainage from the stormwater treatment facilities but was not originally
intended to accept stormwater runoff from this site. Considering this site’s unusual
340
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 6
circumstances and conditions, an exception from the County Ordinance Code’s
prohibition regarding diversions would be required.
2. Required Finding: That the exception is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right.
Project Finding: The diversion of stormwater is necessary to connect the project to
stormwater facilities in the area. A connection at the southeast corner of the property is
not currently possible, meaning this infill project is not feasible unless the exception is
granted. Additionally, as described above, the drainage infrastructure already exists
within the Windhover Way right-of-way making this the most appropriate location.
3. Required Finding: 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: Capacity of the downstream drainage system will be verified to ensure
it is sufficient to accommodate the additional runoff. Additionally, stormwater would be
directed to existing infrastructure used by other properties in the area. Therefore, the
exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
properties in the territory in which the subject property is situated.
The applicant will be required to provide a drainage report to verify the adequacy of the
downstream drainage system. If the receiving system is found to be inadequate the
applicant shall be required to improve the system to make it adequate.
5. Tree Protection and Preservation Findings:
Required Factors for Granting Tree Permit: The Zoning Administrator is satisfied the
following factors as provided by County Code Section 816-6.8010 for granting a tree
permit have been satisfied:
• 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.
• Where the arborist or forester report has been required, and the director is satisfied
that the issuance of a permit will not negatively affect the sustainability of the
resource.
All feasible efforts have been made to retain the maximum number of trees and that
development of this project cannot be reasonably accommodated on other parts of
341
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 7
the property due to the shape and orientation of the property. The trees are
required to be removed in order for the appropriate infrastructure can be built to
support a project of this size. Development on this property can not occur without
the removal of trees. An arborist report was provided which concluded that the trees
to be removed are moderate to low health.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Finding
The project is statutorily exempt from CEQA environmental review pursuant to Public
Resources Code section §21159.25 which exempts certain multi-family housing projects in
urbanized unincorporated county areas. This exemption applies to multifamily residential
housing projects that are consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and
policies, and applicable zoning designation and regulations. Since the project is multifamily
residential, conforms to the applicable General Plan designation and policies, and zoning
designation and regulations and the project is served by all required utilities and public
services, the project is exempt from CEQA. There is no substantial evidence that the project
involves unusual circumstances, including future activities, resulting in, or which might
reasonably result in, significant impacts which threaten the environment.
II. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031
Project Approval
1. Development Plan for a 24-unit apartment project is APPROVED, as generally shown
and based on the following documents:
• Applicant and materials submitted to the Department of Conservation and
Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on October 21, 2021;
• Revised project plans received on March 15, 2022;
• Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan prepared by CALICHI Design Group,
prepared by Reco V. Prianto on February 15, 2022 and received on March 15,
2022;
• Arborist Report prepared by Pam Nagle of Hort Science on January 17, 2022,
Certified Arborist #WE-9617A, received on March 15, 2022;
• Noise Assessment Report prepared by Michael Thill of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc,
on May 10, 2022, received on May 21, 2022;
• Density Bonus Request received on March 15, 2022, and subsequent revised
Density Bonus Requests dated August 24, 2022, October 12, 2022 and December
20, 2022.
2. Approval is granted to allow the following variances that meet the requirements of
Section 26-2.2006 of the County Ordinance Code:
342
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 8
A. 38’-6” building height (where 30’ is the maximum)
B. 24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the minimum required)
3. Approval is granted to allow for the following exception that meet the requirements of
Section 92-6.002 of the County Ordinance Code:
A. Exception to Collect and Convey Requirements.
4. Concession is granted for the following:
A. A reduction to the amount of Open Space requirement from 25% to 20.5%.
5. Reduction in development standards is granted for the following:
A. State density bonus parking ratio; 34 off-street parking spaces provided for this
project.
B. A reduction in development standards to allow for reduced parking stall sizes of
9’ x 18’, 9’ x 17’ and 7.5’ x 14.5’. where 9’ x 19’ is the standard.
C. A reduction in development standards to allow for reducing parking setbacks
including a 2’ side yard (where 20 is the minimum) and a 17.5’ front yard setback
(where 25 is the minimum), per plans.
D. A reduction of the covered parking for 16 total covered spaces (where one-half of
the required spaces shall be covered).
6. Any change from the approved plans shall require review and approval by CDD and may
require the filing of an application to modify the Development Plan.
Application Fees
7. This Development Plan Permit application is subject to an initial application deposit of
$5,000.00, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials 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 2019/553, where a fee payment is over 60 days past due, the Department of
Conservation and Development may seek a court judgement against the applicant and
will charge interest at a rate of ten percent (10%) from the date of judgement. The
applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed
to the applicant shortly after permit issuance.
343
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 9
Indemnification
8. Prior to submitting for building permits, the Applicant(s) shall enter into an
Indemnification Agreement with the County, and the Applicant shall indemnify, defend
(with counsel reasonably acceptable to the County), and hold harmless the County, its
boards, commissions, officers, employees, and agents (collectively "County Parties") from
any and all claims, costs, losses, actions, fees, liabilities, expenses, and damages
(collectively, "Liabilities") arising from or related to the Project, the Applicant's
application for a development plan, the County's discretionary approvals for the Project,
including but not limited to the County's actions pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act and planning and zoning laws, regardless of whether those
Liabilities accrue before or after Project approval.
Compliance Report
9. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, 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. The permit compliance review is subject to
staff time and materials charges, with an initial deposit of $1,500, which shall be paid at
the time of submittal of the compliance report.
Signage
10. No signage is approved with this permit. Any proposed signage is subject to a review
and approval by the Department of Conservation and Development under a Sign Permit
application.
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus
11. This project is subject to 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(a) of the County Ordinance Code, in a residential
development of 22 rental units, at least fifteen percent of the rental units shall be
developed and rented as inclusionary units.
The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 3.3
inclusionary units for the project. The Applicant has submitted a revised Inclusionary
Housing Plan received December 27, 2022, which proposed to construct three
inclusionary units within the housing development. Two units will be available to lower-
344
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 10
income households (80% Area Median Income (AMI)), and one unit will be available to a
very low-income household (50% AMI). The fractional unit of 0.3 would be satisfied with
the payment of a partial in-lieu fee.
The Applicant submitted a revised density bonus request with their revised inclusionary
housing plan received December 27, 2022. As described in the HCI April 19, 2022, memo,
the Applicant is eligible for a 24.5% density bonus as the Applicant proposed to build
on-site three lower-income units or 13% of the units in the housing development as
affordable to lower-income households. For this project, the inclusionary housing units
are also the lower income units that qualify the project for a density bonus. The
Applicant’s Inclusionary Housing Plan and density bonus request propose a density
bonus of 2 units, or a 9% bonus, with one requested concession and various reductions
in development standards, bringing the total number of units in the project from 22 to
24.
Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive
Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant has proposed a housing
development that will contain units that comply with Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A)
and may request one concession/incentive for providing 13 percent of the total units of
a housing development for lower-income households within the development. For use of
the one concession, the Applicant requested reduced open space requirement pursuant
to Government Code 65915(d). Additionally, the Applicant has requested parking ratios
based on Government Code 65915(p) for a reduced parking requirement. The request
also includes reductions in development standards pursuant to Government Code
65915(e) for reduced parking stall sizes, reduced parking setbacks and reduced covered
parking.
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for reductions in development standards
for the following:
Density Bonus – Parking Ratio
• Parking ratios pursuant to 65915 (p).
1 Bedroom Units = 1 off-street parking space (where 1.5 spaces are required)
2 Bedroom Units = 1.5 off street parking space (where 2 spaces are required)
Density Bonus – Reduction of Development Standards
• Parking stall sizes of 9 feet x 18 feet and 9 feet x 17 feet (where 9 feet x 19 feet is
required)
• Front Parking setbacks of 17.5 feet (where 25 feet minimum is required).
345
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 11
• Side Parking setbacks of 2 feet (where 20 feet minimum is required).
• 16 total covered parking (where one-half of the required spaces shall be
covered).
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for one concession, as follows:
• Open space requirement of 20% (where the open space requirement is 25% of
land area, with 75% of that area landscaped)
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement
12. At least 90 days prior to CDD0-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building,
demolition, or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of a
condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall initiate the County’s
preparation and execution of an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing
Agreement (Agreement), form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant
to County Ordinance Chapter 822-4 - Inclusionary Housing, County Ordinance Chapter
822-2 - Density Bonus, and Government Code 65915 to ensure that two (2) of the
approved units are affordable to and occupied by lower-income households, and one (1)
of the approved units is affordable to and occupied by a very low-income household.
The Agreement shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for approval on behalf of
the County. Following the execution of the Agreement, the completed Agreement will be
filed and recorded on the subject property.
The three (3) on-site inclusionary units identified will include:
1 Studio unit at Very Low Income (50% AMI)
2 Two-bedroom units at Lower Income (80% AMI)
Maximum affordable rents shall be determined annually by the County and adjusted for
family size appropriate for the unit.
The continued affordability of all lower-income rental units and very low-income rental
units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income categories for fifty-
five (55) years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage
financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
Definitions
Terms and definitions used in these conditions of approval may be found in the above-
referenced County Ordinance Codes and Government Code.
346
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 12
A. Affordable rent – means a rent, including a reasonable utility allowance determined
by the Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) Director, or designee,
that does not exceed the following calculations pursuant to Health & Safety Code
Section 50053:
For Lower-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times sixty percent of
the area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
For Very Low-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times fifty percent of
the area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
B. Inclusionary Unit – means a rental unit that is required to be rented at an affordable
rent to the households specified in Section 822-4.402.
C. Lower-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed the
lower income limits applicable to Contra Costa County, adjusted for household size,
as published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5.
D. Very Low-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed
the very low-income limits applicable to Contra Costa County adjusted for household
size, as published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50105.
Inclusionary Housing Partial In-Lieu Fee
13. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building, demolition, or
grading permit for the housing development, whichever occurs first, the Applicant
shall pay the County the partial in-lieu fee for the remaining fractional 0.3 inclusionary
unit. The current in-lieu fee calculation is based on the 22 base units, and excludes the
density bonus units, is $48,401.10. However, the actual fee collected will be that which is
applicable prior to CDD approval of the grading permit, building permit, or demolition
permit, whichever occurs first.
This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferrable.
General
14. The following are general terms for the granting of density bonus and the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance.
A. The Applicant hereby represents, warrants, and covenants that it will cause the
Agreement to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County,
347
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 13
California, and in such other places as the County may reasonably request. The
Applicant shall pay all fees and charges incurred in connection with any such
recording. The recording of the Agreement shall occur after the acceptance of the
document by the County and prior to CDD’s approval of a building permit or grading
permit.
B. The County will provide the Applicant a form for income certification to be
completed by the renters. The income levels of all very low-income household and
lower-income household applicants for units in the project shall be certified by DCD
prior to initial occupancy and annually thereafter and records shall be maintained by
the Applicant over the entire term of the period of affordability.
C. The three (3) inclusionary units in the project shall be available for rent on a
continuous basis 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
renting the units, except to the extent that the units are required to be rented to a
very low-income household and lower-income households. 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 rent of any 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 with reference to the selection, location,
number, use, or occupancy of renters of any unit or in connection with employment
of persons for the construction of the project.
D. In addition to any other marketing efforts, the lower-income units, and very low-
income units shall be marketed through local non-profit, social service, faith-based,
and other organizations that have potential renters as clients or constituents. The
Applicant shall translate marketing materials into Spanish and Chinese. A copy of the
translated marketing materials, tenant selection plan, and marketing plan shall be
submitted to Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) at least
three months prior to the marketing of the inclusionary units for the review and
approval of DCD, and on an annual basis with the annual report.
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, Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea
Times, El Mundo, Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily.
E. Upon violation of any of the provisions of the Agreement by the Applicant, the
County may give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the
violation. If the violation is not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a
reasonable period of time, 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
348
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 14
to correct the violation, the County may declare a default under this 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.
Development Standards
15. The inclusionary units are subject to the standards of Section 822-4.412 of the County
Ordinance.
16. All inclusionary units must be constructed and occupied prior to or concurrently with the
market rate units within the same residential development.
Location (Inclusionary Units)
17. Inclusionary units must be dispersed throughout the residential development and have
access to all on-site amenities that are available to market-rate units.
Annual Reporting and Compliance Review
18. Prior to the initial occupancy of each inclusionary unit, the Applicant shall submit to
the Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval compliance
review application and fee along with the following information for review and approval
of qualified tenants: forms and documentation that demonstrates the tenants of the
inclusionary units have been certified as a qualified lower income household or very low-
income households. A hold shall be placed on the final inspection of the building
permit until all documentation has been deemed adequate by the Department of
Conservation and Development.
19. After the initial occupancy of the inclusionary units, the Applicant shall submit to
the Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval
compliance review application and fee along with an annual compliance review
report for all inclusionary units and density bonus units. The report must include the
name, unit number, household size, and income of each person occupying inclusionary
units, identify the number of bedrooms and monthly rent or cost (including utility
allowance) of each inclusionary unit, and the affordability restriction of the unit. Tenants
in rental housing developments shall provide consent to the owners to allow these
disclosures. The annual compliance review report is due April 1.
20. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and
Development informed of the contact information of the owner or local designee who is
349
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 15
responsible for maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be
contacted (i.e., mailing and email addresses, and telephone number) at all times.
A. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building,
demolition, or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of
a condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall provide the
name of the owner or local designee representing the owner of the property for
permit compliance and their contact information including phone number, e-mail
address, and mailing address.
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 project name, project
address, 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.
Park Impact Fee
21. Prior to CDD stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay the applicable park impact fee as established by the Board of
Supervisors.
Park Dedication Fee
22. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay the applicable park dedication fee as established by the Board of
Supervisors.
Child Care Fee
23. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance a building, demolition, or
grading permit, whichever occurs first, for the multiple-family residential building, the
applicant shall pay a per unit fee toward childcare facility needs in the area as
established by the Board of Supervisors.
350
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 16
Aesthetics
24. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, whichever occurs first, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the (CDD) for
review and approval. The lighting plan shall provide the specifications of the proposed
light post as shown on the approved plans. All outdoor lighting shall be directed down
and screened away from adjacent properties and public/private right-of-way to prevent
glare or excessive light spillover.
25. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs first, a final Landscape Plan shall be
submitted to the (CDD) for review and approval. The landscaping plan shall conform to
the County’s Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance. Prior to requesting a final
inspection, the approved landscaping shall be installed and evidence of the installation
(e.g., photos) shall be provided for the review and approval of CDD.
Restitution for Tree Removal
26. Required Restitution for Approved Tree Removal: The following measures are intended
to provide restitution for the removal of seven code-protected trees:
A. Tree Restitution Planting and Irrigation Plan: Prior to the removal of trees or
CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits (e.g.
demolition, grading or building), whichever occurs first, the applicant shall
submit a tree planting and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed arborist or
landscape architect for the review and approval of CDD. The plan shall provide
for the planting of ten 24-inch boxed trees or larger. The plan shall comply
with the County’s Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance. The plan shall be
accompanied by an estimate prepared by a licensed landscape architect or
arborist of the materials and labor costs to complete the improvements on the
plan. The plan shall be implemented prior to final building inspection of the
building.
B. Required Security to Assure Completion of Plan Improvements: Prior to removal
of trees or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building permits
(e.g. demolition, grading or building, whichever occurs first, the applicant
shall submit a security (e.g. bond, cash deposit) that is acceptable to the CDD.
The bond shall include the amount of the approved cost estimate, plus a 20%
inflation surcharge.
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.
351
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 17
D. Duration of Security: The security 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 apartment building 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).
E. Integration with Final Landscape Plan: The tree restitution planting and irrigation
plans described in subsection (a) above may be incorporated as part of the Final
Landscape Plan required pursuant to Condition #26 above. However, the planting
plan shall identify the replacement trees required to replace removed protected
trees, which are intended to satisfy this condition. In addition, the provided
estimate shall only cover materials and labor associated with the implementation
of the required tree restitution, and not for the full landscape plan.
27. Tree removal shall occur only with an approved grading or building permit.
Archeological and Cultural Resources
28. The following measures shall be implemented during project-related ground disturbance
and shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans
for the issuance of a building or grading permit, or tree removal, whichever occurs
first, the applicant shall provide evidence that the measures and requirements listed
below are include on the construction plans.
A. All construction personnel, including operators of equipment involved in grading,
or trenching activities will be advised of the need to immediately stop work if
they observe any indications of the presence of an unanticipated cultural
resource discovery (e.g. wood, stone, foundations, and other structural remains;
debris-filled wells or privies; deposits of wood, glass, ceramics). If deposits of
prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during ground
disturbance activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected
and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and, if necessary,
develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with the County and
other appropriate agencies. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not
necessary.
352
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 18
If eligible, deposits will need to be avoided by impacts or such impacts must be
mitigated. Upon completion of the archaeological assessment, a report should be
prepared documenting the methods, results, and recommendations. The report
should be submitted to the Northwest Information Center and appropriate
Contra Costa County agencies.
B. If human remains are encountered, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be
redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an
archaeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are
of a Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American
Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American
Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the
property and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains
and associated grave goods.
Upon completion of the assessment by an archaeologist, the archaeologist
should prepare a report documenting the methods and results, and provide
recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated
cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations
of the MLD. The report should be submitted to the Northwest Information Center
and appropriate Contra Costa agencies.
Geology and Soils
29. Prior to removal of trees or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building
permits (e.g. demolition, grading or building, whichever occurs first, the project
proponent shall submit a geotechnical report update referencing the proposed grading,
drainage and foundation plans and providing specific criteria and standards for site
grading, drainage and foundation design based on adequate subsurface data, laboratory
testing of samples and engineering analysis. The scope of the geotechnical investigation
shall address the following potential hazards: (i) expansive soils, (ii) corrosive soils, (iii)
siting and design of any required bio-retention facilities and/or other measures that may
be recommended to achieve compliance with the clean water requirements of the
RWQCB, (iv) possible presence of existing undocumented fills and effective measures to
control/ mitigate the settlement hazard, (v) provide seismic parameters based on the
adopted California Building Code at the time that a residential building permit is
requested.
30. Prior to removal of trees or CDD stamp-approval of plans for issuance of building
permits (e.g. demolition, grading or building, whichever occurs first, the
geotechnical report update required by Condition of Approval #29, above, shall be
subject to review by the County’s peer review geologist, and review/approval of the CDD.
Improvement, grading and building plans shall carry out the recommendations of the
approved report.
353
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 19
31. Following rough grading (but prior to commencement of foundation-related work) the
project geotechnical engineer shall perform corrosion potential testing of the graded
building pad to determine if special precautions shall be required to avoid damage to
improvements that are in contact with the ground (concrete or steel).
32. The geotechnical report required by Condition of Approval #29 routinely includes
recommended geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. These
services are essential to the success of the project. They allow the geotechnical engineer
to (i) ensure geotechnical recommendations for the project are properly interpreted and
implemented by contractors, (ii) allow the geotechnical engineer to view exposed
conditions during construction to ensure that field conditions match those that were the
basis of the design recommendations in the approved report, and (iii) provide the
opportunity for field modifications of geotechnical recommendations (with BID
approval), based on exposed conditions. The monitoring shall commence during
clearing, and extend through grading, including testing services during placement of
engineered fill, installation of recommended drainage facilities, and foundation related
work. A hard hold shall be placed on the “final” grading inspection, pending submittal of
a report from the project geotechnical engineer that documents their observation and
testing services during grading, installation of drainage improvements.
Similarly, a hard hold shall be placed on the final building inspection for the
apartment building, pending submittal of a letter-report from the geotechnical engineer
documenting the monitoring services associated with implementation of foundation-
related geotechnical recommendations. The geotechnical monitoring shall include pier
hole drilling/ foundation preparation work/ installation of drainage improvements (e.g.
collection of roof gutter runoff in a closed conduit and conveying it to a suitable
discharge point; and possibly installation of a subdrain system around the perimeter of
the foundation to control moisture beneath the foundation).
33. All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during the dry season (April 15
through October 15) only, and all areas of exposed soils shall be revegetated to minimize
erosion and subsequent sedimentation. After October 15, only erosion control work
shall be allowed, unless additional grading is reviewed and specifically approved by the
Building Inspection Division.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM Program)
34. Consistent with the County’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance,
which requires a residential project with 13 or more units to develop a TDM program, a
TDM Program must be submitted to the CDD for review prior to CDD-stamp approval
of plans for the issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first.
The TDM program shall include at least the following:
354
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 20
A. The TDM Program should include a site map/plan that identifies existing and
proposed bicycle, pedestrian, and transit amenities and improvements. The TDM
program should also include a map/plan identifying key destinations (e.g. schools,
community facilities, parks, shopping areas, major pedestrian and bicycle facilities,
transit stops) in proximity to the project that can be reached by walking, biking, or
taking transit.
B. The TDM Program should identify the promotions, events, and incentives that would
be marketed to residents as part of the program. A list of potential promotions,
events, and incentives can be found on the 511 Contra Costa website.
C. A sample of the virtual format (e.g. website) that would be used to display TDM
information to residents.
D. Within six months following the granting of a certificate of occupancy of the new
development site, the project shall submit to the Director of the Department of
Conservation and Development a TDM notice that confirms the installation of
facilities and site amenities, as well as implementation of commute program features
and events (if required).
Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance
35. In accordance with the County’s Electric Vehicle (EV) Ordinance, the project is required to
provide ten percent of the total parking spaces at the site shall be EV charging spaces
(3). Half of the EV charging spaces (minimum 1 space) shall install fully operational
(minimum Level 2 or higher) EV charging stations. The remaining EV charging spaces
shall be capable of supporting future electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
Parking
36. A total of 8 bicycle spaces shall be provided, consisting of 6 long-term bicycle parking
and 2 short-term bicycle spaces.
Debris Recovery
37. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the issuance of a building or grading
permit, whichever occurs first,, the developer shall submit a Construction Waste
Management Plan, which identifies approved methods to comply with CalGreen
requirement to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65%, or current CalGreen
mandate, of construction and demolition (C&D) waste materials generated at jobsite.
38. Prior to requesting a Final Inspection for the multiple -family residential building,
the developer shall submit a Construction Waste Management Final Report containing
information and supporting documentation that demonstrates compliance with
355
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 21
CalGreen requirements to recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65%, or current
CalGreen mandate, of C&D waste materials generated at jobsite.
Construction Restrictions and Requirements
The following construction restrictions shall be implemented during project construction and
shall be included on all construction plans. Prior to CDD-stamp approval of plans for the
issuance of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide
evidence that the construction restrictions and requirements are include on the face of the
construction plans.
39. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions to
adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all project-
related contractors. The applicant shall notify neighbors within 300 feet of the subject
property at least one week in advance of demolition, grading, and construction activities.
40. The project site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion at all times. All random debris
and trash shall be disposed of in a timely manner.
41. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number and
person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall respond
and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number to call in complaints
shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
42. The applicant shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal
combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate
stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away from existing
residences as possible.
43. The construction contractor shall ensure that unnecessary idling of internal combustion
engines (i.e., idling in excess of 5 minutes) is prohibited.
44. The construction contractor shall utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other
stationary noise sources where technology exists.
45. The construction contractor shall ensure that the construction staging areas shall be
located to create the greatest feasible distance between the staging area and noise-
sensitive receptors nearest the project site.
46. Large trucks and heavy equipment are subject to the same restrictions that are imposed
on construction activates, except the hours are limited to 9:00 am to 4:00 pm.
47. 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
356
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 22
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: https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/pages/state-holidays.aspx
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PERMIT CDDP21-03031
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 submitted to the Department of
Conservation and Development dated on March 15, 2022.
COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A
BUILDING PERMIT.
General Requirements:
48. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted, if
necessary, to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with
357
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 23
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
signage or striping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the
Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department.
Roadway Improvements (Windhover Way):
49. The Applicant shall remove existing curb and sidewalk and install a standard driveway
approach on Windhover Way to serve the project site. Driveway improvements and
conforms shall match existing gutter line and grade.
50. Any cracked and displaced curb, gutter, and sidewalk shall be removed and replaced
along the project frontage of Windhover Way. Concrete shall be saw cut prior to
removal. Existing lines and grade shall be maintained. New curb and gutter shall be
doweled into existing improvements.
Access to Adjoining Property:
Proof of Access
51. 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.
Encroachment Permit
52. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Public Works for construction
of driveways or other improvements within the right-of-way of Windhover Way.
Site Access
53. The Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved
site/development plan.
Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance:
54. The Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveway with
Windover Way in accordance with Chapter 82-18 “Sight Obstructions at Intersections” of
the County Ordinance Code. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide
sight distance at this intersection, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining
walls, or other obstructions proposed at this intersection shall be setback to ensure that
the sight line is clear of any obstructions.
358
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 24
Bicycle – Pedestrian Facilities:
Pedestrian Access
55. Curb ramps and driveways shall be designed and constructed in accordance with current
County standards. A detectable warning surface (e.g. truncated domes) shall be installed
on all curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the curb returns to
accommodate the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on
top of any curb ramp proposed.
Drainage Improvements:
Collect and Convey
56. The 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.
Exception (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval)
Applicant shall be permitted an exception to allow a diversion of stormwater
entering and/or originating on the subject property provided that the applicant
verifies the adequacy of the stormwater facility or natural watercourse to which the
stormwater shall be directed. If the off-site conveyance system, ultimate drainage
facility or natural watercourse to which stormwater is proposed to be diverted is
inadequate, the applicant shall be responsible for all costs related to the
construction and/or right-of-way acquisition related to any necessary improvements
to make the system adequate.
Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements:
57. The Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with
the Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards.
359
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 25
58. The Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and
driveway(s) in a concentrated manner.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES):
59. 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.
-Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm drain
markers.
-Shallow roadside and on-site swales.
-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.
-Filtering Inlets.
-The applicant shall sweep the paved portion of the site at least once a year between
September 1st and October 15th utilizing a vacuum type sweeper. Verification (invoices,
etc.) of the sweeping shall be provided to the County Clean Water Program
Administrative Assistant at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553 (925) 313-2238).
-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 the Public Works
Department.
Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance:
60. 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 issuance of a
360
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 26
building permit. All time and materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP
and the O+M Plan shall be borne by the applicant.
61. 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).
62. 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.
63. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
64. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
65. 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:
66. The Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 57 as
adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a
building permit.
361
ZA – January 23, 2022
County File #CDDP21-03031
Findings and COA
Page 27
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 may be subject to the requirements of the following agencies:
• Department of Conservation and Development, Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa County Public Works Department
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
• Contra Costa County Health Services Department
• Contra Costa Water District
• Mountain View Sanitary District
The applicant is strongly encouraged to review these agencies’ requirements prior to
continuing with the project.
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.
D. 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 Game Code.
E. 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.
362
CDDP21-03031
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 Photo
City Limits
Streets
Building Outlines
Assessment Parcels
World Imagery
Low Resolution 15m Imagery
High Resolution 60cm Imagery
High Resolution 30cm Imagery
Citations
363
CDDP21-03031
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.
General Plan: Multi-Family Residential, High-Density (MH)
City Limits
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)
WA (Water)
WS (Watershed)
Streets 364
DP21-3031DP16-3009
TR7246
DP88-3044
DP89-3036
2041-RZ
MS88-0115
365
CDDP21-03031
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.
Zoning: Multi-Family Residential (M-29)
City Limits
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)
A-3, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation)
A-3 -FH (Flood Hazard Combining District)
A-3, -FH -SG (Flood Hazard and Solar Energy Generation)366
367
368
Windhover Terrace Apartments, County File CDDP21-3031
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus
1. This project is subject to 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(a) of the County Ordinance Code, in a residential development of 22 rental units, at least
fifteen percent of the rental units shall be developed and rented as inclusionary units.
The applicant, owner, and/or developer (Applicant) is required to construct 3.3 inclusionary units for
the project. The Applicant has submitted a revised Inclusionary Housing Plan received December 27,
2022, which proposed to construct three inclusionary units within the housing development. Two
units will be available to lower-income households (80% Area Median Income (AMI)), and one unit
will be available to a very low-income household (50% AMI). The fractional unit of 0.3 would be
satisfied with the payment of a partial in-lieu fee.
The Applicant submitted a revised density bonus request with their revised inclusionary housing
plan received December 27, 2022. As described in the HCI April 19, 2022, memo, the Applicant is
eligible for a 24.5% density bonus as the Applicant proposed to build on-site three lower-income
units or 13% of the units in the housing development as affordable to lower-income households. For
this project, the inclusionary housing units are also the lower income units that qualify the project
for a density bonus. The Applicant’s Inclusionary Housing Plan and density bonus request propose a
density bonus of 2 units, or a 9% bonus, with one requested concession and various reductions in
development standards, bringing the total number of units in the project from 22 to 24.
Density Bonus – Concession/Incentive
Pursuant to Government Code 65915, the Applicant has proposed a housing development that will
contain units that comply with Government Code 65915(b)(1)(A) and may request one
concession/incentive for providing 13 percent of the total units of a housing development for lower-
income households within the development. For use of the one concession, the Applicant requested
reduced open space requirement pursuant to Government Code 65915(d). Additionally, the
Applicant has requested parking ratios based on Government Code 65915(p) for a reduced parking
requirement. The request also includes reductions in development standards pursuant to
Government Code 65915(e) for reduced parking stall sizes, reduced parking setbacks and reduced
covered parking.
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for reductions in development standards for the
following:
• Parking ratios pursuant to 65915 (p).
1 Bedroom Units = 1 off-street parking space (where 1.5 spaces are required)
2 Bedroom Units = 1.5 off street parking space (where 2 spaces are required)
369
• Parking stall sizes of 9 feet x 18 feet and 9 feet x 17 feet (where 9 feet x 19 feet is required)
• Front Parking setbacks of 17.5 feet (where 25 feet minimum is required).
• Side Parking setbacks of 2 feet (where 20 feet minimum is required).
• 16 total covered parking (where one-half of the required spaces shall be covered).
The County accepted the Applicant’s request for one concession, as follows:
• Open space requirement of 20% (where the open space requirement is 25% of land area,
with 75% of that area landscaped)
Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Developer Agreement
2. At least 90 days prior to the Community Development Division’s (CDD) approval of a building,
demolition, or grading permit application, whichever occurs first, and with the filing of a
condition of approval compliance review, the Applicant shall initiate the County’s preparation
and execution of an Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Housing Agreement (Agreement),
form to be provided by the County, with the County pursuant to County Ordinance Chapter 822-
4 - Inclusionary Housing, County Ordinance Chapter 822-2 - Density Bonus, and Government
Code 65915 to ensure that two (2) of the approved units are affordable to and occupied by
lower-income households, and one (1) of the approved units is affordable to and occupied by a
very low-income household. The Agreement shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for
approval on behalf of the County. Following the execution of the Agreement, the completed
Agreement will be filed and recorded on the subject property.
The 3 on-site inclusionary units identified will include:
1 One-bedroom unit for Very Low-Income (50% AMI)
2 Two-bedroom units for Lower-Income (80% AMI)
Maximum affordable rents shall be determined annually by the County and adjusted for family
size appropriate for the unit.
The continued affordability of all lower-income rental units and very low-income rental units
shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income categories for fifty-five (55)
years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance
program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.
Definitions
Terms and definitions used in these conditions of approval may be found in the above-
referenced County Ordinance Codes and Government Code.
370
A. Affordable rent – means a rent, including a reasonable utility allowance determined by the
Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) Director, or designee, that does not
exceed the following calculations pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 50053:
For Lower-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times sixty percent of the area
median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
For Very Low-Income Households: the product of thirty percent times fifty percent of the
area median income adjusted for family size appropriate for the unit.
B. Inclusionary Unit – means a rental unit that is required to be rented at an affordable rent to
the households specified in Section 822-4.402.
C. Lower-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed the lower
income limits applicable to Contra Costa County, adjusted for household size, as published,
and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5.
D. Very Low-Income Households – means a household whose income does not exceed the very
low-income limits applicable to Contra Costa County adjusted for household size, as
published, and periodically updated by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50105.
Inclusionary Housing Partial In-Lieu Fee
3. Prior to CDD approval of a building, demolition, or grading permit for the housing development,
whichever occurs first, the Applicant shall pay the County the partial in-lieu fee for the
remaining fractional 0.3 inclusionary unit. The current in-lieu fee calculation is based on the 22
base units, and excludes the density bonus units, is $48,401.10. However, the actual fee
collected will be that which is applicable prior to CDD approval of the grading permit, building
permit, or demolition permit, whichever occurs first.
This in-lieu fee is non-refundable and non-transferrable.
General
4. The following are general terms for the granting of density bonus and the Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance.
A. The Applicant hereby represents, warrants, and covenants that it will cause the Agreement
to be recorded in the real property records of Contra Costa County, California, and in such
other places as the County may reasonably request. The Applicant shall pay all fees and
charges incurred in connection with any such recording. The recording of the Agreement
shall occur after the acceptance of the document by the County and prior to CDD’s approval
of a building permit or grading permit.
371
B. The County will provide the Applicant a form for income certification to be completed by the
renters. The income levels of all very low-income household and lower-income household
applicants for units in the project shall be certified by DCD prior to initial occupancy and
annually thereafter and records shall be maintained by the Applicant over the entire term of
the period of affordability.
C. The three (3) inclusionary units in the project shall be available for rent on a continuous
basis 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 renting the units, except to the
extent that the units are required to be rented to a very low-income household and lower-
income households. 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 rent of any 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 with reference to the selection, location, number,
use, or occupancy of renters of any unit or in connection with employment of persons for
the construction of the project.
D. In addition to any other marketing efforts, the lower-income units, and very low-income
units shall be marketed through local non-profit, social service, faith-based, and other
organizations that have potential renters as clients or constituents. The Applicant shall
translate marketing materials into Spanish and Chinese. A copy of the translated marketing
materials, tenant selection plan, and marketing plan shall be submitted to DCD at least
three months prior to the marketing of the inclusionary units for the review and approval
of DCD, and on an annual basis with the annual report.
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,
Thoi Bao Magazine, Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo,
Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily.
E. Upon violation of any of the provisions of the Agreement by the Applicant, the County may
give written notice to the Applicant specifying the nature of the violation. If the violation is
not corrected to the satisfaction of the County within a reasonable period of time, 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 this 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.
Development Standards
5. The inclusionary units are subject to the standards of Section 822-4.412 of the County
Ordinance.
372
6. All inclusionary units must be constructed and occupied prior to or concurrently with the market
rate units within the same residential development.
Location
7. Inclusionary units must be dispersed throughout the residential development and have access
to all on-site amenities that are available to market-rate units.
Annual Reporting and Compliance Review
8. Prior to the initial occupancy of each inclusionary unit, the Applicant shall submit to the
Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval compliance review
application and fee along with the following information for review and approval of qualified
tenants: forms and documentation that demonstrates the tenants of the inclusionary units have
been certified as a qualified lower income household or very low-income households. A hold
shall be placed on the final inspection of the building permit until all documentation has been
deemed adequate by the Department of Conservation and Development.
9. After the initial occupancy of the inclusionary units, the Applicant shall submit to the
Department of Conservation and Development, a condition of approval compliance review
application and fee along with an annual compliance review report for all inclusionary units
and density bonus units. The report must include the name, unit number, household size, and
income of each person occupying inclusionary units, identify the number of bedrooms and
monthly rent or cost (including utility allowance) of each inclusionary unit, and the affordability
restriction of the unit. Tenants in rental housing developments shall provide consent to the
owners to allow these disclosures. The annual compliance review report is due April 1.
10. The Applicant is responsible for keeping the Department of Conservation and Development
informed of the contact information of the owner or local designee who is responsible for
maintenance and compliance with this permit and how they may be contacted (i.e., mailing and
email addresses, and telephone number) at all times.
A. Prior to CDD approval of a building or grading permit, whichever occurs first, and with
the filing of a condition of approval compliance review application, the Applicant shall
provide the name of the owner or local designee representing the owner of the property
for permit compliance and their contact information including phone number, e-mail
address, and mailing address.
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 project name, project address, 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.
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
“Accredited by the American Public Works Association”
255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553-4825
TEL: (925) 313-2000 • FAX: (925) 313-2333
www.cccpublicworks.org
Brian M. Balbas, Director
Deputy Directors
Stephen Kowalewski, Chief
Allison Knapp
Warren Lai
Carrie Ricci
Joe Yee
Memo
December 19, 2022
TO: Everett Louie, Project Planner, Department of Conservation and
Development
FROM: Larry Gossett, Senior Civil Engineer, Engineering Services
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DP21-3031
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(West Coast Land Development, Inc./Windhover Way/Martinez/APN 380-220-
066)
FILE: DP21-3031
We have reviewed the revised site plan dated March 15, 2022, along with supplemental
documents and submit the following comments and recommendations:
Background
The applicant requests a development permit to construct a 24-unit apartment complex on a
vacant 0.75-acre parcel on the east side of Windhover Way in unincorporated Martinez area. A
prior application was submitted on the subject property (DP16-3009) for a 16-unit apartment
complex, but the previous application was withdrawn.
The site lies north of Pacheco Boulevard along Windhover Way. Single family residences lie along
the north and south property lines. A townhouse development lies along the east side of the site.
Traffic and Circulation
The subject site fronts Windhover Way, which connects to Pacheco Boulevard, both are County
maintained roads. Windhover Way along the project frontage is approximately 36-foot-wide street
within a 56-foot right-of-way. There is existing curb, sidewalk, streetlights, and underground
utilities along the frontage. No further widening or frontage improvements are necessary with
this development.
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 waters
to an adequate natural watercourse.
380
Everett Louie
December 19, 2022
Page 2 of 3
The property slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner, away and considerably
below street grade. Stormwater runoff from the site will be captured into the bioretention facility
onsite which discharges to an existing 18” storm drain in Windhover Way, effectively diverting
the onsite flows. Section 914-2.004 of the County Ordinance prohibits the diversion of surface
waters from any development. The applicant is seeking an exception to Division 914 of the County
Ordinance and has provided the following finding in accordance with Section 92-6.002 of the
County Ordinance:
1. Required Finding: That there are unusual circumstances or conditions affecting the property.
Project Applicability: The property slopes from the northwest corner to the southeast corner,
away and considerably below street grade. There is no storm drain or easement at the lowest
corner of the site. On-site drainage facilities will be installed to tie into the existing storm drain in
Windhover Way to the west. The storm drain is deep enough to allow for gravity drainage from
the stormwater treatment facilities but was not originally intended to accept stormwater runoff
from this site. Considering this site’s unusual circumstances and conditions, an exception from
the County Ordinance Code’s prohibition regarding diversions would be required.
2. Required Finding: That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right.
Project Applicability: The diversion of stormwater is necessary to connect the project to
stormwater facilities in the area. A connection at the southeast corner of the property is not
currently possible, meaning this infill project is not feasible unless the exception is granted.
Additionally, as described above, the drainage infrastructure already exists within the Windhover
Way right-of-way making this the most appropriate
3. Required Finding: 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 Applicability: Capacity of the downstream drainage system will be verified to ensure it is
sufficient to accommodate the additional runoff. Additionally, stormwater would be directed to
existing infrastructure used by other properties in the area. Therefore, the exception will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the territory in which
the subject property is situated.
Public Works is not averse to granting the exception as the applicant will be required to provide
a drainage report to verify the adequacy of the downstream drainage system. If the receiving
system is found to be inadequate the applicant shall be required to improve the system to make
it adequate.
Stormwater Management and Discharge Control
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 23,790 square feet of impervious surface therefore a stormwater
control plan is required.
381
Everett Louie
December 19, 2022
Page 3 of 3
The applicant has provided a Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan, dated February 2022, which
has been deemed preliminarily complete. However, 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.
Provision C.10, Trash Load Reduction, of the County’s NPDES Permit requires control of trash in
local waterways. To prevent or remove trash loads from municipal storm drain systems, trash
capture devices shall be installed in catch basins (excludes those located within a
bioretention/stormwater treatment facility). Devices must meet the County’s NPDES Permit and
approved by Public Works Department. Location must be approved by Public Works Department.
Floodplain Management
The property does not lie within the Special Flood Hazard Area (100-year flood boundary) as
designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map.
Lighting District Annexation
The subject parcel is already annexed into the L-100 lighting district and will require no further
annexation.
Area of Benefit Fee
The applicant will need to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee
Ordinance for the Martinez Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. The fee
shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits.
Drainage Area Fee and Creek Mitigation
The applicant will be required to comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area
57, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a building
permit.
LG:ss
G:\engsvc\Land Dev\DP\DP 21-3031\Staff Report and COAs.docx
c: J. LaRocque, Engineering Services
K. O’Connor, Engineering Services
West Coast Land Development Inc., owner
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
Calichi Design Group, applicant
705 Oak Street
Hood River, OR 97031
382
PUBLIC WORKS RECOMMENDED
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PERMIT DP21-3031
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 submitted to the Department of
Conservation and Development dated on March 15, 2022.
COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE
OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
General Requirements:
• 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 signage or striping shall be
included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of
the Public Works Department.
Roadway Improvements (Windhover Way):
• Applicant shall remove existing curb and sidewalk and install a standard driveway approach
on Windhover Way to serve the project site. Driveway improvements and conforms shall
match existing gutter line and grade.
• Any cracked and displaced curb, gutter, and sidewalk shall be removed and replaced along
the project frontage of Windhover Way. Concrete shall be saw cut prior to removal. Existing
lines and grade shall be maintained. New curb and gutter shall be doweled into existing
improvements.
Access to Adjoining Property:
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
• Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Public Works for construction of
driveways or other improvements within the right-of-way of Windhover Way.
Site Access
• Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved
site/development plan.
383
Road Alignment/Intersection Design/Sight Distance:
• Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveway with Windover
Way in accordance with Chapter 82-18 “Sight Obstructions at Intersections” of the County
Ordinance Code. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight distance
at this intersection, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining walls, or other
obstructions proposed at this intersection shall be setback to ensure that the sight line is clear
of any obstructions.
Bicycle - Pedestrian Facilities:
Pedestrian Access
• Curb ramps and driveways shall be designed and constructed in accordance with current
County standards. A detectable warning surface (e.g. truncated domes) shall be installed on
all curb ramps. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated at the curb returns to accommodate
the returns and curb ramps; accommodate a minimum 4-foot landing on top of any curb ramp
proposed.
Drainage Improvements:
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.
Exception (Subject to Advisory Agency findings and approval)
Applicant shall be permitted an exception to allow a diversion of stormwater entering
and/or originating on the subject property provided that the applicant verifies the
adequacy of the stormwater facility or natural watercourse to which the stormwater shall
be directed. If the off-site conveyance system, ultimate drainage facility or natural
watercourse to which stormwater is proposed to be diverted is inadequate, the applicant
shall be responsible for all costs related to the construction and/or right-of-way acquisition
related to any necessary improvements to make the system adequate.
Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements:
• Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the
Ordinance Code and Public Works Department design standards.
• Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s)
in a concentrated manner.
384
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES):
• 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.
- Place advisory warnings on all catch basins and storm drains using current storm
drain markers.
- Shallow roadside and on-site swales.
- 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.
- Filtering Inlets.
- The applicant shall sweep the paved portion of the site at least once a year
between September 1st and October 15th utilizing a vacuum type sweeper.
Verification (invoices, etc.) of the sweeping shall be provided to the County Clean
Water Program Administrative Assistant at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez CA 94553
(925) 313-2238).
- 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 the Public Works
Department.
Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance:
• 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 issuance of a building permit. All time and
materials costs for review and preparation of the SWCP and the O+M Plan shall be borne by
the applicant.
• 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).
• 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.
385
• Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
• Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 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.
• 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:
• Applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 57 as adopted
by the Board of Supervisors. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.
ADVISORY NOTES
• 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.
• 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 Game Code.
• 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.
386
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
Telephone: (925) 655-2709 Fax: (925) 655-2750
TO: Everett Louie, Project Planner
FROM: Robert Sarmiento, Transportation Planning Section DATE: June 28, 2022
SUBJECT: Gulway Apartments (DP21-3031)
The Transportation Planning Section has reviewed the transportation impact analysis that was
developed by W-Trans for the subject project. Comments are below; in summary, the comments
pertain to the project description, vehicular parking, electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure,
and a Transportation Demand Management program.
Please let me know if you have any questions and/or direct W-Trans staff to contact me directly if
necessary.
Comments
1. The Project Description should indicate the number of dwelling-unit types based on the
number of bedrooms (e.g. number of 1-bedroom units, 2-bedroom units, etc.)
2. The vehicular parking space requirement for the project should be based on the parking
standards for an M-29 Zoning District 1, which is the zoning district that the project is located
in.
3. In accordance with the County’s EV Ordinance 2, the project will be required to include EV
charging infrastructure in each residential unit. Ten percent of the total parking spaces at the
dwelling site shall be EV charging spaces. Half of the EV charging spaces (minimum 1
space) shall install fully operational (minimum Level 2 or higher) EV charging stations. The
remaining EV charging spaces shall be capable of supporting future electric vehicle charging
infrastructure.
4. Consistent with the County’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance, which
requires a residential project with 13 or more units to develop a TDM program3, a TDM
Program 4 must be submitted to County staff for review prior to issuance of a building permit
for the project.
1 Article 84-26.12. – “Off-Street Parking” (for the M-29 Zoning District): link
2 Section 420.13 – “Electric vehicle (EV) charging for new construction.” (link)
3 TDM Ordinance: link
4 The County’s TDM Ordinance Guide (link) provides guidance on developing a TDM program.
387
File: Transportation > Land Development > Subdivision Review > General > 2022
G:\Transportation\R. Sarmiento\Assignments\Development Review\County\Gulway Apartments (DP21-3031)\Gulway Apartments (DP21-3031)
Comment Letter (6-28-22).docx
cc: John Cunningham, DCD
Maureen Toms, DCD
Anna Battagello, DCD
Jerry Fahy, PWD
Jeff Valeros, PWD
Monish Sen, PWD
388
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
Phone: 925-655-2700
Fax: 925-655-2758
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
Date____________
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
INTERNAL
___ Building Inspection ___ Grading Inspection
___ Advance Planning ___ Housing Programs
___ Trans. Planning ___ Telecom Planner
___ ALUC Staff ___ HCP/NCCP Staff
___ APC PW Staff ___ County Geologist
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
__ Environmental Health __ Hazardous Materials
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
__ Engineering Services (1 Full-size + 3 email Contacts)
__ Traffic
__ Flood Control (Full-size) __ Special Districts
LOCAL
__ Fire District
___ San Ramon Valley – (email) rwendel@srvfire.ca.gov
____ Consolidated – (email) fire@cccfpd.org
____ East CCC – (email) brodriguez@eccfpd.org
__ Sanitary District
__ Water District
__ City of
__ School District(s)
__ LAFCO
__ Reclamation District #_______
__ East Bay Regional Park District
__ Diablo/Discovery Bay/Crockett CSD
__ MAC/TAC
__ Improvement/Community Association
_ CC Mosquito & Vector Control Dist (email)
OTHERS/NON-LOCAL
__ CHRIS (email only: nwic@sonoma.edu)
__ CA Fish and Wildlife, Region 3 – Bay Delta
__ Native American Tribes
ADDITIONAL RECIPIENTS
Please submit your comments to:
Project Planner
Phone #
E-mail
County File #
Prior to
* * * * *
We have found the following special programs apply
to this application:
____ Active Fault Zone (Alquist-Priolo)
____ Flood Hazard Area, Panel #
____ 60-dBA Noise Control
____ CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site
High or Very High FHSZ
* * * * *
AGENCIES: Please indicate the applicable code
section for any recommendation required by law or
ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the
Applicant and Owner.
Comments: ___ None ___ Below ___ Attached
Print Name
Signature DATE
Agency phone #
REVISED 08/12/2019. TO PRINT MORE COPIES: G:\Current Planning\APC\APC Forms\CURRENT FORMS\PLANNING\Agency Comment Request.doc 389
November 18, 2021
Mr. Everett Louie
Contra Costa County
Department Of Conservation And Development
Community Development Division
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
Subject: CCWD Comments on the Windhover Project (County File Number: CDDP21-03031)
Dear Mr Louie:
The following are CCWD’s comments on this project, which is a multifamily residential project on a vacant lot
that includes a 2-story, 16 unit apartment building (8 units per story), and a parking lot with some carport
parking.). The address is 0 Pacheco Blvd, Martinez, CA 94553, and the APN is 380220066. The General Plan
designation is MH, and the zoning district is M-29. The project site is entirely within the service area of CCWD.
The new development will require a fire service, a domestic service and an irrigation service if the landscape
area is greater than 200square feet.
As is typical, CCWD suggests that the applicant work with CCWD’s Engineering Services Coordinator Cindy
Sweeney for the details of the items listed above. She can be reached at 925-688-8014 or at
csweeney@ccwater.com.
Sincerely,
Christine Schneider
Senior Planner
CS:ck
390
November 22, 2021 File No.: 21-0734
Everett Louie, Project Planner
Contra Costa County
Department of Conservation and Development
Community Development Division
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
re: CDDP21-03031 / APN 380-220-066 on Pacheco Blvd, Martinez / Calichi Design Group
Dear Everett Louie:
Records at this office were reviewed to determine if this project could adversely affect cultural resources.
Please note that use of the term cultural resources includes both archaeological sites and historical buildings
and/or structures. The review for possible historic-era building/structures, however, was limited to
references currently in our office and should not be considered comprehensive.
Project Description: Request approval of a Development Plan application to allow the development of a
multifamily residential project on a vacant lot that includes a 2-story, 16 unit apartment building (8 units per
story), and a parking lot with some carport parking.
Previous Studies:
XX This office has no record of any previous cultural resource studies for the proposed project area (see
recommendation below).
Archaeological and Native American Resources Recommendations:
The proposed project area has the possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). A study is
recommended prior to commencement of project activities.
XX We recommend the lead agency contact the local Native American tribe(s) regarding traditional, cultural,
and religious heritage values. For a complete listing of tribes in the vicinity of the project, please contact
the Native American Heritage Commission at (916)373-3710.
XX The proposed project area has a low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). Therefore,
no further study for archaeological resources is recommended.
391
Built Environment Recommendations:
XX Since the Office of Historic Preservation has determined that any building or structure 45 years or older
may be of historical value, if the project area contains such properties, it is recommended that prior to
commencement of project activities, a qualified professional familiar with the architecture and history of
Contra Costa County conduct a formal CEQA evaluation.
Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that
have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional
information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical
resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource
information not in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Inventory, and you should
contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts.
The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) contracts with the California Historical Resources
Information System’s (CHRIS) regional Information Centers (ICs) to maintain information in the CHRIS inventory
and make it available to local, state, and federal agencies, cultural resource professionals, Native American
tribes, researchers, and the public. Recommendations made by IC coordinators or their staff regarding the
interpretation and application of this information are advisory only. Such recommendations do not necessarily
represent the evaluation or opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer in carrying out the OHP’s
regulatory authority under federal and state law.
For your reference, a list of qualified professionals in California that meet the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards can be found at http://www.chrisinfo.org. If archaeological resources are encountered during the
project, work in the immediate vicinity of the finds should be halted until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated
the situation. If you have any questions please give us a call (707) 588-8455.
Sincerely,
Bryan Much
Coordinator
392
393
394
395
396
1
Everett Louie
From:Will Nelson
Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 9:16 AM
To:Everett Louie
Cc:Daniel Barrios
Subject:DP21-3031 Agency Comments
Hi Everett,
Advance Planning staff has reviewed this application and offers the following comments:
The project is consistent with the policies for the Vine Hill/Pacheco Boulevard area.
It appears that little, if any, land would be deducted from this parcel for public use. In other words, the gross and
net acreage are likely similar for purposes of calculating density. If the density calculation allows for more units,
Advance Planning would support a denser project.
We’re curious as to whether the applicant explored acquisition of additional parcels, such as those between the
project site and Pacheco Boulevard? Including those parcels in the project would allow for increased density and
an improved Pacheco Boulevard streetscape.
Let use know if you have questions.
‐Will
William R. Nelson
Principal Planner
Contra Costa County
Department of Conservation and Development
30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553
Phone (925) 655-2898
Web www.contracosta.ca.gov
**PLEASE NOTE, THE DEPARTMENT HAS NEW PHONE NUMBERS AS OF APRIL 1.
MY NEW PHONE NUMBER IS 925‐655‐2898.**
We’re planning for the future of Contra Costa County.
Learn more and get involved at envisioncontracosta2040.org.
397
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
Phone: 925-655-2700
Fax: 925-655-2758
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
Date____________
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
INTERNAL
___ Building Inspection ___ Grading Inspection
___ Advance Planning ___ Housing Programs
___ Trans. Planning ___ Telecom Planner
___ ALUC Staff ___ HCP/NCCP Staff
___ APC PW Staff ___ County Geologist
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
__ Environmental Health __ Hazardous Materials
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
__ Engineering Services (1 Full-size + 3 email Contacts)
__ Traffic
__ Flood Control (Full-size) __ Special Districts
LOCAL
__ Fire District
___ San Ramon Valley – (email) rwendel@srvfire.ca.gov
____ Consolidated – (email) fire@cccfpd.org
____ East CCC – (email) brodriguez@eccfpd.org
__ Sanitary District
__ Water District
__ City of
__ School District(s)
__ LAFCO
__ Reclamation District #_______
__ East Bay Regional Park District
__ Diablo/Discovery Bay/Crockett CSD
__ MAC/TAC
__ Improvement/Community Association
_ CC Mosquito & Vector Control Dist (email)
OTHERS/NON-LOCAL
__ CHRIS (email only: nwic@sonoma.edu)
__ CA Fish and Wildlife, Region 3 – Bay Delta
__ Native American Tribes
ADDITIONAL RECIPIENTS
Please submit your comments to:
Project Planner
Phone #
E-mail
County File #
Prior to
* * * * *
We have found the following special programs apply
to this application:
____ Active Fault Zone (Alquist-Priolo)
____ Flood Hazard Area, Panel #
____ 60-dBA Noise Control
____ CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site
High or Very High FHSZ
* * * * *
AGENCIES: Please indicate the applicable code
section for any recommendation required by law or
ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the
Applicant and Owner.
Comments: ___ None ___ Below ___ Attached
Print Name
Signature DATE
Agency phone #
REVISED 08/12/2019. TO PRINT MORE COPIES: G:\Current Planning\APC\APC Forms\CURRENT FORMS\PLANNING\Agency Comment Request.doc 398
414 13th Street, 5th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 510.444.2600 w-trans.com
SANTA ROSA • OAKLAND
September 6, 2022
Ms. Pamela West
West Coast Land Development, Inc.
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
Transportation Impact Analysis for the Gulway Apartments
Residential Development Project
Dear Ms. West;
As requested, W-Trans has prepared a transportation impact analysis for the proposed Gulway Apartments
residential development to be located in unincorporated Contra Costa County near the City of Martinez. The
purpose of this letter is to document existing conditions and evaluate the project’s potential transportation
impacts and effect on traffic operations.
Existing Conditions
The study area includes a portion of Windhover Way along the project site frontage and the intersection of
Pacheco Boulevard/Windhover Way in unincorporated Contra Costa County. Windhover Way is classified as a local
road and has a north-south orientation. Along the project site’s frontage Windhover Way is 35 feet wide with two
10.5-foot travel lanes and parallel parking permitted on both sides. It has a prima facie speed limit of 25 mph.
Windhover Way intersects with Pacheco Boulevard approximately 160 feet south of the proposed location for the
project driveway. Pacheco Boulevard is classified as a Route of Regional Significance according to the Central
County Action Plan (September 2017) and is oriented in the east-west direction. It has one travel lane and a bike
lane in each direction together with a two-way left-turn lane. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. Parking is
permitted on both sides where there is sufficient width. Turning movement counts at the intersection of Pacheco
Boulevard and Windhover Way indicate that Pacheco Boulevard carries about 1,600 vehicles during the peak hour
and Windhover Way serves about 25 vehicles during the peak hour.
Project Description
The proposed project would result in the construction of 24 new dwelling units on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN)
380-220-066. The 24 units would be composed of 12 one-bedroom units and 12 two-bedroom units. Three of the
units would be affordable, with two two-bedroom low-income units and one one-bedroom very low-income unit.
The site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The project site would be primarily served by the proposed driveway
located on Windhover Way approximately 160 feet north of Pacheco Boulevard.
Trip Generation
The anticipated trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021 for “Multifamily Housing
(Low-Rise)” (ITE LU #220). The site is currently undeveloped and therefore not generating any trips. For a
conservative analysis, trip reductions resulting from nearby transportation options were not applied. Further
reductions attributable to internal capture, pass-by or any other trip reductions are not applicable and therefore
have also not been applied.
The expected trip generation potential for the proposed project is indicated in Table 1. The proposed project is
expected to generate an average of 162 trips per day, including 10 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 12 during
the p.m. peak hour; these new trips represent the increase in traffic associated with the project.
399
Ms. Pamela West Page 2 September 6, 2022
Table 1 – Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 24 du 6.74 162 0.40 10 2 8 0.51 12 8 4
Note: du = dwelling unit
Trip Distribution
The pattern used to allocate new project trips to the street network was based on a review of turning movements
at the study intersection and knowledge of local circulation patterns. The applied distribution assumptions and
resulting trips are shown in Table 2.
Table 2 – Trip Distribution Assumptions
Route Percent Daily AM Trips PM Trips
To/From the west via Pacheco Blvd 53% 86 5 6
To/From the east via Pacheco Blvd 47% 76 5 6
TOTAL 100% 162 10 12
Collision Analysis
The collision history for the study intersection was reviewed to identify any trends or patterns that may indicate a
potential safety issue. Collision rates were calculated based on records available from the California Highway
Patrol as published in their Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) reports. The most current five-
year period available is from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021.
The calculated collision rate for the intersection of Pacheco Boulevard/Windhover Way was compared to the
average collision rate for similar facilities statewide, as indicated in 2018 Collision Data on California State Highways,
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). These average rates statewide are for intersections in the same
environment (urban, suburban, or rural), with the same number of approaches (three or four), and the same
controls (all-way stop, two-way stop, or traffic signal).
Six collisions were documented at the study intersection between January 2017 and December 2021. This equates
to a collision rate of 0.20 crashes per million vehicles entering the intersection (c/mve). The statewide average
collision rate for four-legged stop-controlled intersections in urban settings is 0.14 c/mve and therefore the study
intersection has a higher collision rate than the statewide average.
Of the six collisions that occurred during the study period, three were rear-end, one was sideswipe, one was
broadside, and one was a collision with an object. No clear trend can be gathered from the collision sample given
the distribution of different types of collisions. Further, the injury rate at the intersection was 33.3 percent,
substantially lower than the Statewide average of 46.2 percent. As a result, there is no clear safety concern at this
time.
Intersection Level of Service Methodologies
Level of Service (LOS) is used to rate traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes and
roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents
400
Ms. Pamela West Page 3 September 6, 2022
free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. A unit of measure that
indicates a level of delay generally accompanies the LOS designation.
The study intersection was analyzed using the "Two-Way Stop-Controlled” (TWSC) unsignalized methodology
published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transportation Research Board, 2010. This source contains
methodologies for various types of intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in
average number of seconds per vehicle. The TWSC methodology determines a level of service for each minor
turning movement by estimating the level of average delay in seconds per vehicle. Results are presented for
individual movements together with the weighted overall average delay for the intersection.
Traffic Operation Standards
Contra Costa County established a Level of Service (LOS) Standard of LOS E for roadway segments and
intersections along a Route of Regional Significance in the Contra Costa County Transportation Analysis Guidelines,
2020. This document states that development projects are required to address operational deficiencies where the
addition of project traffic to an intersection along a Route of Regional Significance results in the degradation of
intersection operations from an acceptable level (LOS E or better) to an unacceptable level (LOS F). Similarly,
development projects are required to address operational deficiencies where the addition of project traffic
increases the worst movement delay (for unsignalized intersections) by more than five seconds at intersections
that are already operating at unacceptable levels.
Short-Term Conditions
The Existing Conditions scenario provides an evaluation of current operation based on existing traffic volumes
during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak periods. This condition does not include project-generated traffic volumes.
Traffic volume data was collected on March 8, 2022, while local schools were operating with in-person learning
and indicates that the study intersection is operating at an overall LOS A during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
However, the side street approach operates at LOS F and E during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively.
Upon the addition of project-related traffic to the existing volumes, the study intersection is expected to continue
operating at an overall LOS A and the side street approach is expected to continue operating at LOS E or F.
Additional volume-based analysis was conducted since this unsignalized intersection is projected to operate at
LOS F during the a.m. peak hour and the addition of project traffic would increase delay by more than five seconds.
The peak hour volume warrant indicating a potential need for a traffic signal would not be satisfied under the
Existing plus Project traffic volumes. It is noted that the nearby upstream traffic signal at Pacheco
Boulevard/Camino Del Sol meters vehicle arrivals, which effectively creates gaps in the westbound traffic stream
along Pacheco Boulevard. These gaps in the traffic stream occur with suitable frequency and create a situation
where vehicles exiting from Windhover Way likely experienced less average delay than what is calculated using
standard HCM methodologies. Therefore, it can be assumed that the average delay per vehicle reported using the
HCM methodology is higher and more conservative than what may be experienced in the field. These results are
summarized in Table 33. Copies of the traffic count data sheets and Level of Service calculations are enclosed.
401
Ms. Pamela West Page 4 September 6, 2022
Table 3 – Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service
Study Intersection
Approach
Existing Conditions Existing plus Project
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
Pacheco Blvd/Windhover Wy 1.6 A 0.6 A 2.1 A 0.8 A
Southbound (Windhover Wy) Approach 60.3 F 36.2 E 68.5 F 40.2 E
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service. Bold text = deficient operation
Traffic Signal Warrant
A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted to determine the potential need for a traffic signal at the
intersection of Pacheco Boulevard/Windhover Way based on a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes under Existing plus
Project Conditions. Chapter 4C of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD) provides
guidance on when a traffic signal should be considered. For the purposes of this study only Warrant 3, the peak
hour warrant, was considered.
Warrant 3 is satisfied when an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories
are met:
A. If all three of the following conditions exist for the same one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute
periods) of an average day:
1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach (one direction
only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach; or five
vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach, and
2. The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles
per hour for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per hour for two moving lanes, and
3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per hour for
intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more
approaches.
B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and
the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only)
for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve
in Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes.
The peak hour warrant would not be satisfied during either the a.m. or p.m. peak hours by the traffic volumes at
the intersection of Pacheco Boulevard/Windhover Way. A copy of the Warrant 3 worksheet is enclosed.
Finding – The study intersection is expected to continue operating at the same Level of Service upon the addition
of project-generated traffic to Existing Conditions as without it. According to the analysis, the project would
increase delay on the Windhover Way southbound approach to Pacheco Boulevard by more than five seconds
during the a.m. peak hour, which is considered an adverse effect on traffic operations. However, the peak hour
traffic signal warrant would not be satisfied for this intersection and this level of delay is common where minor
local streets intersect a Route of Regional Significance. Additionally, the analysis does not account for the effect of
the adjacent signalized intersection and its metering of traffic and creation of gaps in the traffic flow, which may
result in a higher calculated average delay per vehicle than what may actually be experienced at the intersection.
402
Ms. Pamela West Page 5 September 6, 2022
Recommendation – While delay on the minor Windhover Way approach to Pacheco Boulevard would be
expected to increase by more than five seconds due to the project, the peak hour volumes on the stop-controlled
approach would be insufficient to warrant signalization, and as this project would develop the last vacant parcel
feeding into the intersection, volumes would not ever be expected to reach the level needed to warrant
signalization. Given the lack of a safety concern that could be addressed through right-of-way controls and the
low volumes, no further action is recommended.
Site Circulation and Access
Vehicular Site Access
The proposed project includes a new driveway on Windhover Way located approximately 160 feet north of the
intersection with Pacheco Boulevard. Both left and right turns would be permitted at the proposed driveway.
Vehicular Sight Distance
At driveways a substantially clear line of sight should be maintained between the driver of a vehicle waiting at the
crossroad and the driver of an approaching vehicle. Adequate time must be provided for the waiting vehicle to
either cross, turn left, or turn right, without requiring the through traffic to radically alter their speed. Sight distance
along Windhover Way at the proposed project driveway was evaluated based on sight distance criteria contained
in the Highway Design Manual published by Caltrans. The recommended sight distances for driveways are based
on stopping sight distance, which uses the approach travel speeds as the basis for determining the recommended
sight distance. Based on the prima facie speed of 25 mph along Windhover Way, the minimum stopping sight
distance needed is 150 feet.
Sight distances at the proposed driveway location were field measured so include consideration for the vegetation
and topography along Windhover Way. The available sight distance at the proposed driveway along Windhover
Way exceeds 150 feet in each direction. However, parked vehicles adjacent to the driveway opening would limit
sight lines to less than the required 150 feet. Therefore, parking should be prohibited within 20 feet of both sides
of the driveway to preserve adequate sight lines.
Sight distance was also field measured at the southbound Windhover Way approach to the intersection with
Pacheco Boulevard. At side-street approaches, the recommended sight distances are based on corner sight
distance as published by Caltrans in the Highway Design Manual. To establish the critical 85th percentile speed for
vehicles traveling on Pacheco Boulevard, a spot speed survey was conducted in the field. Vehicles were observed
to have a critical speed of approximately 40 mph in both directions. Therefore, the required sight distance along
Pacheco Boulevard is 385 feet to the east and 445 feet to the west for drivers exiting from Windhover Way. A copy
of the speed survey is enclosed.
The sight lines from Windhover Way were observed to be obstructed to the west by parked vehicles along the
north side of Pacheco Boulevard. With the existing parking configurations, sight distance was field measured to
be approximately 350 feet to the west, which is less than the minimum corner sight distance required in the
Highway Design Manual. To the east, sight distance was field measured in excess of 385 feet and is therefore
considered adequate. To achieve adequate sight distance, parking prohibitions along the north side of Pacheco
Boulevard within 20 feet west of the intersection are recommended.
Finding – Sight distances along Windhover Way at the proposed driveway are inadequate for the prima facie
speed of 25 mph due to parking adjacent to the driveway location. Similarly, sight lines are also inadequate at the
Windhover Way approach to Pacheco Boulevard to the west for the observed 85th percentile speed of 40 mph due
to adjacent parking.
403
Ms. Pamela West Page 6 September 6, 2022
Recommendation – To achieve adequate sight lines at the project driveway, parking should be prohibited within
20 feet of the proposed driveway to ensure that adequate sight lines are maintained. On Pacheco Boulevard, it is
recommended that parking restrictions within 20 feet west of the intersection with Windhover Way implemented
to provide adequate sight lines at the Windhover Way approach.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation
Consideration was given to the project’s potential generation of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The Contra Costa
County Public Works Department adopted a VMT policy on June 23, 2020, in their document Transportation
Analysis Guidelines. Guidance provided in this document recommends the use of screening thresholds to identify
when a proposed project is presumed to result in a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed
study. According to the Contra Costa County Travel Demand Model estimates, the Countywide home-based
average VMT per resident is 19.4 miles. Concurring with guidance provided by this document, a project located
anywhere in the County which generates a VMT that is 15-percent or more below this value, or 16.5 miles per
resident, should be expected to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact and would not require further VMT
analysis.
The project would be located within Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 20034 of the Contra Costa Travel Demand Model
which has a home-based VMT of 16.0 miles per resident. Because this per capita VMT rate of 16.0 is lower than the
significance threshold of 16.5 miles, the project is presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact and does
not require further VMT analysis. Further, adjacent TAZs west of I-680, including 20033 and 20038, also have a per
capita VMT rate that is less than the significance threshold so are consistent with TAZ 20034. A summary of the
VMT findings is provided in Table 4.
Table 4 – Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Summary
VMT Metric Baseline
VMT Rate
Significance
Threshold
Project
VMT Rate
Resulting
Significance
Residential VMT per Capita
(Countywide Baseline) 19.4 16.5 16.0 Less-Than-Significant
Note: VMT Rate is measured in VMT per Capita, or the number of daily miles driven per resident
Finding – The project would be expected to have a VMT per capita less than 15-percent below the countywide
VMT per resident. Therefore, the project is presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact.
Alternative Modes
Pedestrian Facilities
A network of sidewalks, crosswalks and curb ramps are generally provided along Windhover Way and Pacheco
Boulevard within the study area.
Project Summary – Internal pedestrian access within the site is provided via a network of sidewalks, curb ramps,
and pathways. The project would also provide new sidewalks on the western side of the project driveway,
connecting to the existing sidewalk on Windhover Way. All pedestrian facilities are presumed to be built to satisfy
current Contra Costa County Public Works Department standards.
Finding – Existing and proposed pedestrian facilities serving the project site would be adequate.
404
Ms. Pamela West Page 7 September 6, 2022
Bicycle Network
A northbound Class II bike lane exists on Pacheco Boulevard within the study area. Bicyclists ride in the roadway
and/or on sidewalks along all other streets within the project Study Area.
Project Summary – The project does not propose to modify or construct new bicycle facilities within the study
area.
Finding – Existing bicycle facilities serving the project site would be adequate.
Transit Facilities
Development sites which are located within a one-half mile walk of a transit stop are generally considered to be
adequately served by transit.
County Connection
County Connection provides fixed route bus service in Contra Costa County. Two bicycles can be carried on most
buses. Bike rack space is on a first come, first served basis. Additional bicycles are allowed on buses at the discretion
of the driver. The County Connection provides bus service to the immediate study area via four local routes.
Line 18 provides weekday service between the Martinez Amtrak station and Pleasant Hill BART Station, via
Pacheco Boulevard and Morello Avenue. Service is provided between 6:00 a.m. and 9:30 p.m. with an
approximately 80-minute headway. The bus stop nearest the project site is near the intersection of Morello
Avenue/Pacheco Boulevard, approximately one-quarter mile from the project site.
Line 19 provides weekday service between the Martinez Amtrak station and Diablo Valley College via Pacheco
Boulevard. Service is provided between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. with 55-minute headways during the peak period
and 110-minute headways during off-peak periods. The bus stop closest to the project site is near 4001 Pacheco
Boulevard, approximately 0.1 mile from the project site.
Line 99x provides peak period weekday service between the Martinez Amtrak Station and the North Concord
BART Station via Pacheco Boulevard. On weekdays, service is provided from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 3:30
p.m. to 6:30 p.m. with a bus arriving every 20 to 30 minutes. The bus stop closest to the project site is near the
intersection of Morello Avenue/Pacheco Boulevard, approximately one-quarter mile from the project site.
Line 316 provides weekend service between the Martinez Amtrak Station and the Pleasant Hill BART Station via
Pacheco Boulevard. Weekend service is provided between 7:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. with headways of 80 minutes.
The closest bus stop to the project site is near the intersection of Morello Avenue/Pacheco Boulevard,
approximately one-quarter mile from the project site.
Amtrak
Amtrak is a passenger railroad service that provides medium- and long-distance service between cities in the
United States and Canada, with a station in Martinez approximately three miles from the project site at 601 Marina
Vista Road. The Martinez Amtrak Station is served by the Capitol Corridor, California Zephyr, Coast Starlight, and
San Joaquin passenger train services.
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
The BART system provides regional rail service between San Mateo, San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and
Santa Clara counties. The nearest BART station is the North Concord BART Station at 3700 Port Chicago Highway,
which is approximately six miles from the project site. This station is served by the Antioch, Pittsburg, and San
Francisco International Airport lines. On weekdays during peak commute periods trains have a 15-minute
405
Ms. Pamela West Page 8 September 6, 2022
headway. During all other times (off-peak periods and weekends), trains operate at 20-minute headways. Typical
hours of operation for BART are between the hours of 5:00 a.m. and midnight during the weekday, 6:00 a.m. to
midnight on Saturdays and 8:00 a.m. to midnight on Sundays.
County Connection LINK
Dial-a-ride, also known as paratransit, or door-to-door service, is available for those who are unable to
independently use the transit system due to a physical or mental disability. The study area is served by the County
Connection LINK that offers paratransit services. This service is designed to serve the needs of individuals with
disabilities within Contra Costa County.
On-Demand Transportation Services
On-demand private vehicle services (e.g., taxi, Uber, Lyft, etc.) are available in Contra Costa County 24 hours a day.
These vehicles can be used for trips within Contra Costa County and adjacent destinations.
Project Summary – If 20 percent of peak hour trips were made by transit, there would be two and three additional
transit riders during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours respectively, spread out over multiple routes and times. The
volume of riders expected to be generated by the project would therefore be unlikely to exceed the carrying
capacity of the existing bus service near the project site, especially when spread over several routes and times.
Finding – The project site is adequately served by transit since there are existing transit stops within one-half mile
and numerous routes and travel options.
Parking Facilities
The project was analyzed to determine whether the proposed parking supply would be enough to satisfy the
County Code requirements for developments that fall under the M-29 (Multiple Family Residential District) zoning.
The Contra Costa County Municipal Code, Article 84-26.12 Off-street parking requirements state that one and one-
half off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each one-bedroom unit, and two spaces shall be provided for
each two-bedroom unit. Additional guest parking spaces are also required at a rate of one-quarter space per unit.
As there are 12 one-bedroom units and 12 two-bedroom units proposed, the project should provide at least 48
parking spaces based on County Code requirements. Table 5 summarizes the County’s parking requirements as
they apply to the proposed project.
Table 5 – County Parking Requirement Summary
Unit Description Parking Requirement Number of Units Required Number of
Parking Spaces
One-Bedroom 1.5 parking spaces per unit 12 18
Two-Bedroom 2 parking spaces per unit 12 24
All Units 0.25 guest parking spaces per unit 24 6
TOTAL 48
Note: Parking Requirements per Contra Costa Municipal Code Article 84-26.12
However, California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives §65915(p).3 states that a
city or county shall not impose vehicular parking standards if the development is located within one-half mile of
a major transit stop. Given that County Connection transit stops are within one-half mile of the project site as
detailed previously, the on-site parking required by the project shall not be governed by County Code
requirements. Instead, the project is permitted to meet the minimum requirements as specified by California
406
Ms. Pamela West Page 9 September 6, 2022
Government Code. Section 65915(o).6 of the California Government Code defines the total number of units as the
number of units less those added by a density bonus. For this project, two of the units would be added by a density
bonus. Further, parking requirements under §65915(p) require one parking space for every zero-bedroom or one-
bedroom unit, and one and one-half parking spaces for every two or three-bedroom unit where a development
provides affordable housing. Requirements for guest parking and parking for those with disabilities are specifically
excluded under that same section. Based on these two Code sections, the project is required to provide at least
28 parking spaces, as summarized in Table 6.
Table 6 – State Parking Requirement Summary
Unit Description Parking Requirement Number of Units Required Number of
Parking Spaces
Density Bonus 0 parking spaces per unit 2 0
One-Bedroom 1 parking space per unit 11 11
Two-Bedroom 1.5 parking spaces per unit 11 17
TOTAL 24 28
Note: Parking Requirements per California Government Code Section 4.3
The site plan shows that 33 parking spaces would be provided. Based on California Government Code parking
requirements, the proposed project provides more than the minimum number of parking spaces required to meet
the state’s requirements.
The projected parking demand was also estimated using standard rates published by ITE in Parking Generation, 5th
Edition, 2019 for “Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)” (ITE LU #220). According to the ITE estimates, 25 parking spaces
would be required to accommodate the expected demand.
Finding – The proposed parking supply of 33 spaces would not satisfy the County’s Code requirement of 48
spaces; however, it would exceed the minimum of 28 required parking spaces per California Government Code
requirements and the anticipated parking demand of 25 spaces per the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition,
2019.
Electric Vehicle Parking
Contra Costa County outlines specific electric vehicle (EV) parking requirements for multifamily residential
projects. The Contra Costa Municipal Code Section 4.106.4.2 New Multifamily Dwellings of Article 74-4.006 states
that ten percent of the on-site parking shall be EV charging spaces. At least half of the EV spaces shall be equipped
with fully operational EV supply equipment of at least Level Two. The remaining EV parking spaces shall be capable
of supporting future EV supply equipment.
Since 33 parking spaces are proposed as part of the project, at least four spaces are required to be EV parking
spaces. Of the four spaces, two must be equipped with Level Two EV supply equipment. The project would include
four EV spaces with two having fully operational Level Two EV supply equipment, satisfying the County’s
requirement for EV parking. Additionally, the project would also provide a number of “pre plumbed” conduits with
supportive infrastructure for future EV use as needed.
Finding – The project would include four EV parking spaces, of which two would include fully operational Level
Two EV supply equipment. This meets the minimum requirements set forth by the County, and therefore the
proposed EV parking is adequate.
407
Ms. Pamela West Page 10 September 6, 2022
Bicycle Parking
Article 82-16.412, Bicycle Parking, of the Contra Costa County Municipal Code states that one long-term bicycle
storage facility shall be provided for approximately every seven bedrooms (15 percent) and one short-term bicycle
storage facility shall be provided for every 20 bedrooms (5 percent). Since 36 bedrooms are being proposed, the
project is required to provide at least six long-term bicycle storage spaces and at least two short-term bicycle
storage spaces. As part of the project, six long-term bicycle storage lockers would be provided as well as two short-
term bicycle storage spaces. Therefore, the proposed project provides enough bicycle storage facilities to meet
the County’s requirements.
Finding – Proposed bicycle storage facilities exceed the minimum number of long-term and short-term
requirements set by the County.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan
The following section describes the proposed TDM plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 82-32 of the Contra
Costa County Municipal Code. A separate, more detailed TDM plan document will be prepared and submitted for
County review as well. It should be noted that the project’s density (i.e., dwelling units per acre) and presence of
affordable housing also reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) but are not included here as they are
considered inherent to the development.
Education, Outreach & Marketing
The HOA management company will provide customized transportation information to the community’s
residents when a unit is leased or offered for rent. This information should be available in print and virtual format
and should include elements such as:
County Connection bus and BART timetables;
The locations of the nearest bus and BART stops;
Information regarding transit passes;
Promotion of the 511 Contra Costa incentive programs;
Directions to and information on the Pacheco Transit Center;
Biking and walking maps, including highlighting existing and new pedestrian connections to key
destinations;
Bike parking locations and instructions for proper use; and
Bicycle safety training literature with information on local bike safety/training programs.
This information should be maintained in a readily accessible location for this community even though a resident
may also locate this information on their own through various online sources. Implementation of an educational
program dedicated to outreach and marketing as described above would result in an estimated reduction in VMT
of 0.9-percent according to Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, California Air Pollution Control
Officers Association (CAPCOA), 2010.
Finding – Implementation of the Transportation Demand Management program as described above and as
required under County Code would result in an estimated VMT reduction of 0.9 percent.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The proposed project would generate an average of 162 net-new daily trips, including 10 new trips during
the a.m. peak hour and 12 new trips during the p.m. peak hour.
408
Ms. Pamela West Page 11 September 6, 2022
The study intersection of Pacheco Boulevard and Windhover Way has a higher collision rate than the
statewide average for similar facilities. However, as the injury rate was substantially lower than the statewide
average, no remedial action is recommended.
The study intersection is expected to continue operating at the same Levels of Service with and without the
project.
The peak hour traffic signal warrant is not satisfied for the unsignalized intersection of Pacheco
Boulevard/Windhover Way under all conditions with and without the project. Given the low volume and lack
of a demonstrated safety concern that could be addressed through signalization, no improvements are
recommended.
The sight distances at the proposed new driveway access on Windhover Way and at the Windhover Way
approach to Pacheco Boulevard are inadequate due to adjacent parking. To achieve adequate sight lines, it is
recommended that parking be prohibited within 20 feet of both sides of the proposed project driveway, and
within approximately 20 feet west of the Windhover Way approach to Pacheco Boulevard.
The proposed project would have a less-than-significant transportation impact on Vehicle Miles Traveled.
Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities would be adequate to serve the project as proposed.
The proposed project would provide a parking supply of 33 spaces which is greater than what is required
under the California Government Code and greater than the estimated demand based on standard ITE rates;
however, it is less than the required parking per the County Code.
The proposed project would meet County Code requirements regarding EV parking since four EV spaces
would be included, with two spaces having fully operational Level Two EV supply equipment.
The number of short- and long-term bicycle parking spaces proposed (two and six, respectively) would be
greater than the County’s requirement for these types of bicycle storage facilities.
Implementation of the Transportation Demand Management program as proposed and as required under
County Code would result in an estimated VMT reduction of 0.9 percent.
Thank you for giving W-Trans the opportunity to provide these services. Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Brunetto, PE
Associate Engineer
Kenny Jeong, PE
Senior Engineer
Mark Spencer, PE
Senior Principal
MES/kbj-ngb/CCX023.L1
Enclosures: Turning Movement Counts, Intersection LOS Analysis, Traffic Signal Warrant Evaluation, Speed
Survey
409
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID:22-080089-001 Day:
City:Martinez Date:
AM 120120 AM
NOON 0000 NOON
PM 6040 PM
AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0000 0 11 0 3
0 647 0 744
002 0019 0 5
609 0 TEV 1616 0 1666 0 000
798 0 943 0 PHF 0.86 0.94
8011 0 0000
AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 03011PM
NOON 0000NOON
AM 07021AM
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Totals (PM) Total Bikes (PM)
0
13
NORTHBOUND
Windhover Way/Sodaro Dr
Totals (NOON) Total Bikes (NOON)
NONE
958 0 831
Totals (AM)30 Total Bikes (AM)Pacheco BlvdEASTBOUNDWESTBOUNDPacheco Blvd763 0 658
CONTROL
2-Way Stop(NB/SB)
0 NONE
04:45 PM - 05:45 PM 20
Windhover Way/Sodaro Dr & Pacheco Blvd
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Windhover Way/Sodaro Dr Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 3/8/2022
4:00 PM - 06:00 PMPEAK HOURS07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 9 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM COUNT PERIODSNOONAM PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON
NOONPMAMNOONAMPMNOONAMPMNOONPMAM00 0
00 0
10 010 000 0
00 030 120 30
1
00
4
0 0000000
0
00
0
0 0000000
2
00
0
0 00000011
647
1911
943
9 60411030
0
00
0
0 0000003
744
58
798
6 120122107410
HCM 2010 Two-Way Stop
Sodaro Dr/Windhover Way & Pacheco Blvd 06/02/2022
Existing AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
W-Trans Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 798 8 5 744 3 7 0 21 12 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 6 798 8 5 744 3 7 0 21 12 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 100 - - 100 --------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 7 928 9 6 865 3 8 0 24 14 0 14
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 868 0 0 937 0 0 1833 1827 933 1838 1830 867
Stage 1 ------947947-879879-
Stage 2 ------886880-959951-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 776 - - 731 - - 59 77 323 58 76 352
Stage 1 ------314340-342365-
Stage 2 ------339365-309338-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 776 - - 731 - - 56 76 323 53 75 352
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------5676-5375-
Stage 1 ------311337-339362-
Stage 2 ------323362-283335-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.1 36.3 60.3
HCM LOS E F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 147 776 - - 731 - - 92
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.221 0.009 - - 0.008 - - 0.303
HCM Control Delay (s) 36.3 9.7 - - 10 - - 60.3
HCM Lane LOS E A - - A - - F
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 0 - - 0 - - 1.1
411
HCM 2010 Two-Way Stop
Sodaro Dr/Windhover Way & Pacheco Blvd 06/02/2022
Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
W-Trans Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 2.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 798 8 5 744 4 7 0 21 16 0 16
Future Vol, veh/h 7 798 8 5 744 4 7 0 21 16 0 16
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 100 - - 100 --------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 8 928 9 6 865 5 8 0 24 19 0 19
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 870 0 0 937 0 0 1838 1831 933 1841 1833 868
Stage 1 ------949949-880880-
Stage 2 ------889882-961953-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 775 - - 731 - - 58 76 323 58 76 352
Stage 1 ------313339-342365-
Stage 2 ------338364-308338-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 775 - - 731 - - 54 75 323 53 75 352
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------5475-5375-
Stage 1 ------310336-339362-
Stage 2 ------318361-282335-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.1 37.2 68.5
HCM LOS E F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 144 775 - - 731 - - 92
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.226 0.011 - - 0.008 - - 0.404
HCM Control Delay (s) 37.2 9.7 - - 10 - - 68.5
HCM Lane LOS E A - - A - - F
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.8 0 - - 0 - - 1.6
412
HCM 2010 Two-Way Stop
Sodaro Dr/Windhover Way & Pacheco Blvd 06/02/2022
Existing PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
W-Trans Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 943 11 19 647 11 3 0 11 4 0 6
Future Vol, veh/h 9 943 11 19 647 11 3 0 11 4 0 6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 100 - - 100 --------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 10 1003 12 20 688 12 3 0 12 4 0 6
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 700 0 0 1015 0 0 1766 1769 1009 1769 1769 694
Stage 1 ------1029 1029 - 734 734 -
Stage 2 ------737740-1035 1035 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 897 - - 683 - - 65 83 292 65 83 443
Stage 1 ------282311-412426-
Stage 2 ------410423-280309-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 897 - - 683 - - 62 80 292 61 80 443
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------6280-6180-
Stage 1 ------279308-407414-
Stage 2 ------392411-266306-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.3 29.3 36.2
HCM LOS D E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 163 897 - - 683 - - 126
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.091 0.011 - - 0.03 - - 0.084
HCM Control Delay (s) 29.3 9.1 - - 10.4 - - 36.2
HCM Lane LOS D A - - B - - E
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.3
413
HCM 2010 Two-Way Stop
Sodaro Dr/Windhover Way & Pacheco Blvd 06/02/2022
Existing Plus Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
W-Trans Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 943 11 19 647 15 3 0 11 6 0 8
Future Vol, veh/h 13 943 11 19 647 15 3 0 11 6 0 8
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 100 - - 100 --------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 14 1003 12 20 688 16 3 0 12 6 0 9
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 704 0 0 1015 0 0 1778 1781 1009 1779 1779 696
Stage 1 ------1037 1037 - 736 736 -
Stage 2 ------741744-1043 1043 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 894 - - 683 - - 64 82 292 64 82 442
Stage 1 ------279308-411425-
Stage 2 ------408421-277306-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 894 - - 683 - - 61 78 292 59 78 442
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------6178-5978-
Stage 1 ------275303-404413-
Stage 2 ------388409-262301-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 0.3 29.6 40.2
HCM LOS D E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 161 894 - - 683 - - 117
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.093 0.015 - - 0.03 - - 0.127
HCM Control Delay (s) 29.6 9.1 - - 10.4 - - 40.2
HCM Lane LOS D A - - B - - E
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 0 - - 0.1 - - 0.4
414
Warrant 3: Peak-Hour Volumes and Delay
Street Name
Direction
Number of Lanes
Approach Speed
Population less than 10,000?No
Date of Count:
Scenario:
Warrant 3 Met?: Met when either Condition A or B is met No
Condition A: Met when conditions A1, A2, and A3 are met Not Met
Condition A1 Not Met
0.17
Condition A2 Not Met
14 vph
Condition A3 Met
1676 vph
Condition B Not Met
Minor Approach Volume:
The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for
intersections with four or more appraches or 650 vph for intersections with three
approaches
Total Entering Volume:
The plotted point falls above the curve
The volume on the same minor street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds
100 vph for one moving lane of traffic of 150 vph for two moving lanes
11
35 25
Existing
The total delay experienced by traffic on one minor street approach (one direction only)
controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle-hours for a one lane approach,
or five vehicle-hours for a two-lane approach
Minor Approach Delay: vehicle-hours
Tuesday, March 8, 2022
Major Street Minor Street
Pacheco Boulevard Windhover Way
E-W N-S
Pacheco Boulevard & Windhover Way Project Name:Windhover Way Apartments
Contra Costa County
Intersection:1
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800MINOR STREET―HIGHER VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)MAJOR STREET―TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES
VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH)
Warrant 3, Peak Hour
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE
1 LANE & 1 LANE
4/7/2022 Signal Warrant Analysis
415
Street: From: To:
Overall Vehicles Sampled:96
85th Percentile Speed:39 mph
Mean (50th Percentile) Speed:34 mph
Pace:30 to 40 mph
Eastbound Vehicles Sampled:48
85th Percentile Speed:37 mph
Mean (50th Percentile) Speed:34 mph
Pace:30 to 40 mph
Westbound Vehicles Sampled:48
85th Percentile Speed:39 mph
Mean (50th Percentile) Speed:34 mph
Pace:30 to 40 mph
Date Data Collected: Start Time: Weather:Sunny
Day of the Week: End Time: Recorder:NB
Summary of Output
11:30 AM
11:40 AMThursday
April 7, 2022
Contra Costa County
Speed Survey
Pacheco Boulevard Camino Del Sol Sodaro Drive
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Number RecordedSpeed
Speed Profile
Eastbound Westbound Total
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
PercentSpeed
Cumulative Speed Profile
416
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
January 17, 2022
Mr. Jared West
West Coast Land and Development
145 John Glen Drive
Concord, CA 94520
Subject: Arborist Report
0 Pacheco Boulevard
Martinez, CA
Dear Mr. West:
West Coast Land and Development is planning to re-develop the property located at 0
Pacheco Boulevard (APN #380-220-066), near Windhover Way and Pacheco Blvd, in
Martinez. HortScience | Bartlett Consulting, Divisions of The F. A. Bartlett Tree Expert
Company, was asked to prepare an Arborist Report for the trees within the project area
as part of the application to Contra Costa County. This report responds to that request.
Description of Trees
I visited the site on December 21, 2021. Nine (9) trees representing seven (7) species
were evaluated (Table 1), tagged as #35 - 43. All but one of the species were
represented by a single tree. Trees assessed were typical of the area; California black
walnut #37 and coast redwood #39 are native to California. Two of the trees assessed
(#39 and #43) were off-site. Overall, five of the trees were in poor condition, three were
in fair condition, and one (off-site coast redwood #39) was in good condition.
Descriptions of each tree are found in the Tree Assessment, and approximate locations
are plotted on the Tree Assessment Map (see Exhibits).
Table 1. Condition ratings and frequency of occurrence of trees
0 Pacheco Boulevard. Martinez, CA.
Common Name Scientific Name Condition Total
Poor
(1-2)
Fair
(3)
Good
(4-5)
California black walnut Juglans hindsii 1 -- 1
Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum 1 --1
Olive Olea europaea 1 2 - 3
London plane Platanus x hispanica -1 -1
Carolina cherry laurel Prunus caroliniana 1 -- 1
Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens --1 1
Siberian elm Ulmus pumila 1 --1
Total 5 3 1 9
The site was an open, undeveloped, "flag" lot with trees and shrubs growing along its
perimeter. There were residential lots on all four sides of the property, with an area for a
potential street entrance off Windhover Way.
417
Arborist Report. 0 Pacheco Blvd. Martinez, CA. Page 2
January 2022
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
The following are brief descriptions of the trees:
London plane #35 was in fair condition with a diameter of 21 inches. It had
multiple branch attachments and a vase-shaped crown (Photo 1).
Carolina cherry laurel #36 was a shrubby tree with stems ranging from 4 to 16
inches arising from its base. It was in poor condition with extensive branch
dieback.
California black walnut #37 was growing at the east fence. It had stems of 3 and
8 inches at about 3 ft. above grade and was in poor condition with defective
structure.
Glossy privet #38 was nearby,
in shrub form. It had multiple stem
attachments from 2 to 4 inches in
diameter and was in poor condition.
Off-site coast redwood #39 was
the largest tree assessed, with a
diameter of 27 inches (Photo 2). It was
in good condition, with form and
structure typical of the species.
Olives #40, 41 and 42 had
multiple stems rising from their bases
with stem diameters ranging from 5 to
11 inches (Photo 2). Condition ranged
from fair (#40 and 41) to poor (#43).
The olives had a history of limb
removal, and were growing close to the
north property fence.
Photo 1 (left). London
plane #35 was growing
near the southeast
corner of the site.
Photo 3. Off-site
Siberian elm #43 was
growing near Windhover
Way.
Photo 2. Off-site coast redwood (red arrow) and olives #42 – 40 (L to R, yellow
arrows) were growing at the north end of the property.
418
Arborist Report. 0 Pacheco Blvd. Martinez, CA. Page 3
January 2022
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
Off-site Siberian elm #43 was
growing near the sidewalk on
Windhover Way. It was 16
inches in diameter and had
codominant trunks. The elm
had been repeatedly pruned
back from a nearby light pole
and was in poor condition
(Photo 3).
On properties in unincorporated areas, Contra Costa County protects certain indigenous
tree species with a trunk diameter of 6.5 inches or greater. Based on this definition,
California black walnut #37 and coast redwood #39 were considered Protected.
Protected trees cannot be removed nor can construction occur within their driplines
without a permit. Protected status of individual trees is identified in the Tree
Assessment (see Exhibits).
419
Arborist Report. Windhover Way. Martinez, CA. Page 4
January 2022
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
Suitability for Preservation
Before evaluating the impacts that will occur during development, it is important to
consider the quality of the tree resource itself, and the potential for individual trees to
function well over an extended length of time. Trees that are preserved on development
sites must be carefully selected to make sure that they may survive development
impacts, adapt to a new environment and perform well in the landscape.
Evaluation of suitability for preservation considers several factors:
Tree health
Healthy, vigorous trees are better able to tolerate impacts such as root injury,
demolition of existing structures, changes in soil grade and moisture, and soil
compaction than are non-vigorous trees.
Structural integrity
Trees with significant amounts of wood decay and other structural defects that
cannot be corrected are likely to fail. Such trees should not be preserved in
areas where damage to people or property is likely.
Species response
There is a wide variation in the response of individual species to construction
impacts and changes in the environment. In our experience, coast redwood is
tolerant of construction impacts if properly irrigated, while California black walnut
is intolerant of site disturbance.
Tree age and longevity
Old trees, while having significant emotional and aesthetic appeal, have limited
physiological capacity to adjust to an altered environment. Young trees are
better able to generate new tissue and respond to change.
Invasiveness
Species which spread across a site and displace desired vegetation are not
always appropriate for retention. This is particularly true when indigenous
species are displaced. The California Invasive Plant Inventory Database
(http://www.cal-ipc.org/paf/) lists species identified as being invasive. Martinez is
part of the Central West Floristic Province. Glossy privet and olive are listed as
having limited invasiveness potential. Species with limited invasiveness potential
are invasive but their ecological impacts are minor on a statewide level or there
was not enough information to justify a higher score.
Each tree was rated for suitability for preservation based upon its age, health, structural
condition and ability to safely coexist within a development environment. Suitability
ratings are provided for each tree in the Tree Assessment Forms (see Exhibits).
Table 1: Tree Suitability for Preservation
Windhover Way. Martinez, CA.
High These are trees with good health and structural stability that have the
potential for longevity at the site. Off-site coast redwood #39 had
high suitability for preservation.
Moderate Trees in this category have fair health and/or structural defects that
may be abated with treatment. Trees in this category require more
intense management and monitoring, and may have shorter life-
spans than those in the “high” category. Olives #40 and 41 and
London plane #35 had moderate suitability for preservation.
420
Arborist Report. 0 Pacheco Blvd. Martinez, CA. Page 5
January 2022
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
Low Trees in this category are in poor health or have significant defects in
structure that cannot be abated with treatment. These trees can be
expected to decline regardless of management. The species or
individual tree may possess either characteristics that are
undesirable in landscape settings or be unsuited for use areas. Five
trees had low suitability for preservation: Carolina cherry laurel #36,
California black walnut #37, glossy privet #38, olive #42, and off-site
Siberian elm #43.
We consider trees with high suitability for preservation to be the best candidates for
preservation. We do not recommend retention of trees with low suitability for
preservation in areas where people or property will be present. Retention of trees with
moderate suitability for preservation depends upon the intensity of proposed site
changes.
Evaluation of Impacts
Appropriate tree retention requires a practical match between the location and intensity of
construction activities and the quality and health of the trees. The Tree Assessment
was the reference point for tree condition and quality. I used the Topographic Survey of
Parcel C (Sousa Land Surveys, 7/22/2019) and the Gulway Apartments Site, Paving, and
Horizontal Control Plan (Architectural Concepts, 10/8/2019) to determine the project area
and evaluate impacts to trees.
The plans propose construction of a two-story multi-residential building of approximately
7,470 square feet. A new driveway from Windhover Way and parking areas will be built
around it, with new trees and landscaping planned along the perimeters.
The site will be intensely re-developed from property line to property line and potential
impacts to trees will be severe. Eight (8) trees will be removed (#35 – 38 and 40 – 42, as
well as off-site tree #43, which appears to be within the limits of grading at the road). Of
these trees, California black walnut #37 is Protected. Off-site redwood #39 will remain;
this tree is also Protected. Due to its proximity to the property, the redwood may be
impacted by grading and construction activities.
Based on my assessment of the plans and evaluation of the trees, I recommend
preservation of off-site redwood #39, provided recommendations included in the Tree
Preservation Guidelines (following page) can be followed.
Tree Preservation Guidelines
The goal of tree preservation is not merely tree survival during development but
maintenance of tree health and beauty for many years. Retained trees that are either
subject to extensive injury during construction or are inadequately maintained become a
liability rather than an asset. The response of individual trees will depend on the amount
of excavation and grading and the construction methods.
The following recommendations will help reduce impacts to trees from development and
maintain and improve their health and vitality through the clearing, grading and
construction phases.
421
Arborist Report. 0 Pacheco Blvd. Martinez, CA. Page 6
January 2022
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
Design recommendations
1. Where possible, include the location of all trees within 10 feet of the project limit.
Include trunk locations on all project plans.
2. The project’s perimeter security fence will also serve as the TREE PROTECTION
ZONE. No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials should occur
outside the project limit.
3. All plans affecting trees shall be reviewed by the Consulting Arborist with regard
to tree impacts. These include, but are not limited to, demolition plans, grading
plans, drainage plans, utility plans, and landscape and irrigation plans.
4. Irrigation systems must be designed so that no trenching severs roots larger than
2 in. in diameter will occur within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE.
5. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees
and labeled for that use. Pre-construction treatments and recommendations
1. The project’s perimeter security fence will also serve as the TREE PROTECTION
ZONE. No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials should occur
outside the project limit.
2. Off-site trees to be preserved may require pruning to provide clearance for
demolition, grading and construction. Tree care firm providing the pruning shall
be a State of California Licensed Tree Contractor (C61/D49). All pruning shall be
done by Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker in accordance with the latest
edition of the Best Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of
Arboriculture) and the American National Standard for Tree Care Operations
(Z133.1) and Pruning (A300).
3. Tree(s) to be removed that have branches extending into the canopy of tree(s) to
remain shall be removed by a Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker and not
by the demolition contractor. The Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker shall
remove the trees in a manner that causes no damage to the tree(s) and
understory to remain.
4. Trees to be removed shall be felled so as to fall away from TREE PROTECTION
ZONE and avoid pulling and breaking of roots of off-site trees to remain. If roots
are entwined, the Consulting Arborist may require first severing the major woody
root mass before extracting the trees.
5. All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California
Fish and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent
feasible tree pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding
season. Breeding bird surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified
biologists should be involved in establishing work buffers for active nests.
Recommendations for tree protection during construction
1. Any approved grading, construction, demolition or other work within 5 ft. of the
Tree Protection Zone near tree #39 should be monitored by the Consulting
Arborist.
422
Arborist Report. 0 Pacheco Blvd. Martinez, CA. Page 7
January 2022
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company
325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA ● 925.484.0211 ● www.hortscience.com
2. Any root pruning that will occur within 5 ft. of the Tree Protection Zone near tree
#39 shall receive the prior approval of and may be supervised by the Consulting
Arborist. Roots should be cut with a saw to provide a flat and smooth cut.
Removal of roots larger than 2” in diameter should be avoided.
3. If roots 2” and greater in diameter are encountered during site work and must be
cut to complete the construction, the Consulting Arborist must be consulted to
evaluate effects on the health and stability of the tree and recommend treatment.
4. If injury should occur to any tree during construction, it should be evaluated as
soon as possible by the Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can
be applied.
If you have any questions regarding my observations or recommendations, please feel
free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Pam Nagle
Consulting Arborist and Urban Forester
Certified Arborist #WE-9617A
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Attached: Tree Assessment Form
Tree Assessment Plan
423
Tree No. Species Trunk Diameter (in.)Protected Tree?Condition 1=poor 5=excellentSuitability for PreservationComments35 London plane 21 No 3 Moderate Multiple attachments (U-shaped) at 5.5'; spreading vase-shaped crown.36 Carolina cherry laurel16,12,6,5,4No 2 Low Multiple attachments arise from base; 2' from fence; history of limb removal; topped; branch dieback top half crown.37 California black walnut8,3 Yes 2 Low At rear fence; engulfed in shrubs; poor form and structure.38 Glossy privet 4,4,3,3,2,2 No 2 LowAt rear fence; multiple attachments at 3'; slight lean E.39 Coast redwood 27 Yes 4 HighOff-site; tag on fence. Typical form and structure; canopy pruned up ~15'; slightly drought-stressed. Overhang onto property: approx. 12'.40 Olive 11,8,7,7,5 No 3 Moderate Multiple attachments arise from base; 1' from N. fence; history of limb removal; vase form.41 Olive 10,9,8,7,6,5No 3 Moderate Multiple attachments arise from base; 1' from N. fence; history of limb removal; crowded; crown bows W.; vase form.42 Olive 8,7,6 No 2 Low Multiple attachments arise from base; at N. fence; history of limb removal; open form.43 Siberian elm 16 No 2 LowOff-site; no tag. In right-of-way; 1' from sidewalk; codominant stems at 6' w/ included bark; poor form and structure; history of limb removal. Overhang onto property: approx. 20'.Tree Assessment0 Pacheco BoulevardMartinez, CADecember 2021
424
Tree Assessment Plan 0 Pacheco Boulevard Martinez, CA Prepared for: West Coast Land & Development, Inc. Concord, CA December 2021 No Scale Notes: Base map provided by: Sousa Land Surveys Fairfield, CA Numbered tree locations are approximate. TS = Too small (tree less than 6” in diameter) Not included in this assessment. 325 Ray Street Pleasanton, California 94566 Phone 925.484.0211 Fax 925.484.0596 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 TS 425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
WINDHOVER TERRACE APARTMENTS
NOISE ASSESSMENT
Martinez, California
May 10, 2022
Prepared for:
Mr. Robert West
West Coast Land and Development
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
Prepared by:
Michael S. Thill
Principal Consultant
429 E. Cotati Avenue
Cotati, CA 94931
(707) 794-0400
Project: 22-058
439
1
INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the results of the noise assessment prepared for the Windhover Terrace
Apartments project in Martinez, California. The analysis evaluates the compatibility of the
proposed project with respect to the noise levels resulting from vehicular traffic along Pacheco
Boulevard and other roadways serving the site. The report presents background information on
environmental noise and definitions of the technical terms used in the assessment, the applicable
regulatory criteria used in the assessment, a summary of existing noise levels, and our evaluation
of the compatibility of the proposed project with the noise environment at the project site. Noise
reduction measures are presented to provide an acceptable interior noise environment per City of
Martinez guidelines and State Building Code requirements.
SETTING
Fundamentals of Environmental Noise
Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing
or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness. Pitch
is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of the
vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than sounds
with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with the reception
characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an ocean wave in that it is
a measure of the amplitude of the sound wave.
In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales which
are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which
indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest
sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are
calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten-fold increase in
acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more
intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and its
intensity. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of
loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical terms are defined in Table 1.
There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the A-
weighted sound level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which
the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units of dBA
are shown in Table 2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a
method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the
variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an
average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events.
This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common averaging period
is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration.
440
2
The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can
accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various
computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways
and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is from
the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus
1 to 2 dBA.
Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night -- because excessive noise
interferes with the ability to sleep -- 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate
artificial noise penalties added to quiet-time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty added
to evening (7:00 pm - 10:00 pm) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 pm - 7:00 am) noise
levels. The Day/Night Average Sound Level (DNL or Ldn) is essentially the same as CNEL, with
the exception that the evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three-hour
period are grouped into the daytime period.
Effects of Noise
The thresholds for speech interference indoors are about 45 dBA if the noise is steady and above
55 dBA if the noise is fluctuating. Outdoors the thresholds are about 15 dBA higher. Steady noises
of sufficient intensity (above 35 dBA) and fluctuating noise levels above about 45 dBA have been
shown to affect sleep. Interior residential standards for multi-family dwellings are set by the State
of California at 45 dBA Ldn. Typically, the highest steady traffic noise level during the daytime is
about equal to the Ldn and nighttime levels are 10 dB lower. The standard is designed for sleep and
speech protection and most jurisdictions apply the same criterion for all residential uses. Typical
structural attenuation is 12 to 17 dB with open windows. With standard construction and closed
windows in good condition, the noise attenuation factor is around 20 dB for an older structure and
25 dB for a newer dwelling. Sleep and speech interference is therefore of concern when exterior
noise levels are about 57 to 62 dBA Ldn with open windows and 65 to 70 dBA Ldn if the windows
are closed. Levels of 55 to 60 dBA are common along collector streets and secondary arterials,
while 65 to 70 dBA is a typical value for a primary/major arterial. Levels of 75 to 80 dBA are
normal noise levels at the first row of development outside a freeway right-of-way. In order to
achieve an acceptable interior noise environment, bedrooms facing secondary roadways need to
be able to have their windows closed, those facing major roadways and freeways typically need
special glass windows.
441
3
TABLE 1 Definition of Acoustical Terms Used in this Report
Term Definition
Decibel, dB A unit describing, the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm
to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the
reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20 micro Pascals.
Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micro
Pascals (or 20 micro Newtons per square meter), where 1 Pascal is the
pressure resulting from a force of 1 Newton exerted over an area of 1 square
meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the
logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the
sound to a reference sound pressure (e. g., 20 micro Pascals). Sound
pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level
meter.
Frequency, Hz The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below
atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000
Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above
20,000 Hz.
A-Weighted Sound Level,
dBA
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter
using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes
the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner
similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with
subjective reactions to noise.
Equivalent Noise Level,
Leq
The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.
Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the
measurement period.
L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of
the time during the measurement period.
Day/Night Noise Level,
DNL or Ldn
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after
addition of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and
7:00 am.
Community Noise
Equivalent Level, CNEL
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after
addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after
addition of 10 decibels to sound levels measured in the night between 10:00
pm and 7:00 am.
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing
level of environmental noise at a given location.
Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a
given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its
amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or
informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.
Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Harris, 1998.
442
4
TABLE 2 Typical Noise Levels in the Environment
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise Level (dBA)
Common Indoor Activities
110 dBA Rock band
Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet
100 dBA
Gas lawn mower at 3 feet
90 dBA
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph Food blender at 3 feet
80 dBA Garbage disposal at 3 feet
Noisy urban area, daytime
Gas lawn mower, 100 feet 70 dBA Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet
Commercial area Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy traffic at 300 feet 60 dBA
Large business office
Quiet urban daytime 50 dBA Dishwasher in next room
Quiet urban nighttime 40 dBA Theater, large conference room
Quiet suburban nighttime
30 dBA Library
Quiet rural nighttime Bedroom at night, concert hall
(background)
20 dBA
Broadcast/recording studio
10 dBA
0 dBA
Source: Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS), California Department of Transportation, September 2013.
443
5
Regulatory Criteria
2019 California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2.
The current version of the California Building Code (CBC) requires interior noise levels
attributable to exterior environmental noise sources to be limited to a level not exceeding 45 dBA
Ldn/CNEL in any habitable room.
City of Martinez 1985 Noise Element of the General Plan.1
The Noise Element of the City of Martinez General Plan establishes standards for noise and land
use compatibility for new residential land uses. These standards consider noise levels of 60 dBA
Ldn or less normally acceptable provided that buildings are of normal conventional construction,
without any special noise insulation requirements. where the exterior noise exposure is between
60 dBA and 70 dBA Ldn residential use is considered ‘conditionally acceptable’ such that new
construction should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements
and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Interior noise levels of 45 dBA Ldn or
less are considered normally acceptable.
Existing Noise Environment
A noise monitoring survey was conducted to quantify the existing noise environment at the site
between Wednesday, April 27, 2022 and Friday, April 29, 2022. The noise monitoring survey
included two long-term noise measurements (LT-1 and LT-2) and three short-term noise
measurements (ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3), as showing in Figure 1. All noise measurements were
conducted with Larson Davis Laboratories Model LxT1 Sound Level Meters fitted with ½-inch
pre-polarized condenser microphones and windscreens. The meters were calibrated with a Larson
Davis Model CAL200 precision acoustic calibrator prior to and following the measurement survey.
The internal clocks of the sound level meters were synchronized to ensure both identical sound
level response and simultaneous operation.
The noise monitor at location LT-1 was positioned at a height of 12 feet above the existing grade
on a tree along the west boundary of the site. Vehicular traffic on Pacheco Boulevard and
Windhover Way was the predominant noise source affecting the site. The measured noise levels
at this location, including the energy equivalent noise level (Leq), maximum (Lmax), minimum
(Lmin), and the noise levels exceeded 1, 10, 50 and 90 percent of the time (indicated as L1, L10, L50
and L90) are shown on Figures 2-4. A review of the data indicates that the noise levels at site LT-
1 follow a diurnal pattern characteristic of traffic noise, with the average daytime noise levels
ranging from 54 to 66 dBA Leq and the average nighttime hourly noise levels ranging from 50 to
357 dBA Leq. The Day/Night Noise Level during on April 28, 2022 was 62 dBA Ldn.
The noise monitor at location LT-2 was also positioned at a height of 12 feet above the existing
grade on a tree along the north boundary of the site. Distant vehicular traffic was the predominant
noise source affecting the site, with average daytime noise levels ranging from 49 to 57 dBA Leq
and the average nighttime hourly noise levels ranging from 48 to 53 dBA Leq. The Day/Night
1 The City of Martinez in currently updating its General Plan Noise Element. The updated plan has not yet been
adopted. As a result, the current noise standards and policies, adopted in November 1985 are used in this document.
444
6
Noise Level during on April 28, 2022 was 58 dBA Ldn. The measured noise levels at this location
are shown on Figures 5-7.
A series of short-term noise measurements were made concurrently with the long-term
measurements at LT-1 and LT-2 on the morning of Wednesday, April 27, 2022. Traffic along
Pacheco Boulevard was the predominant noise source at these locations. Table 3 summarizes the
noise measurement results at ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3.
TABLE 3 Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Data, April 27, 2022
Noise Measurement Location
Time
Begin Lmax L(1) L(10) L(50) L(90) Leq
ST-1: ~90 feet from the center of
Willow Pass Road along
easternmost site boundary, 5-feet
above the ground.
9:40 am 73 68 63 59 50 61
ST-2: Southeast corner of site, 5-
feet above the ground. 10:00 am 59 57 53 50 48 51
ST-3: Northeast corner of site, 5-
feet above the ground. 10:20 am 56 54 52 49 45 49
Noise and Land Use Compatibility Assessment
Future Exterior Noise Environment
The future noise environment at the project site will continue to result primarily from vehicle
traffic along Pacheco Boulevard. An increase in traffic volumes along Pacheco Boulevard would
correlate to an increase in noise levels at the project site. The Martinez General Plan Update
forecasts a traffic noise level increase of 1 dBA Ldn along the adjacent segment of Pacheco
Boulevard by the year 2040, with the future Ldn projected to reach 71 dBA at 75 feet from the
roadway centerline.2
Common outdoor us areas are proposed along the south and east boundaries of the site. Existing
noise levels measured in these areas ranged from 55 to 59 dBA Ldn. By 2040, the unmitigated noise
level would be expected to increase by 1 dBA Ldn and would range from 56 to 60 dBA Ldn. The
project also proposes the construction of a 6-foot masonry wall along the south boundary of the
site that would provide additional noise reduction. Therefore, future exterior noise levels would be
less than 60 dBA Ldn and within the “normally acceptable” noise and land use compatibility range
identified for residential land uses.
2 City of Martinez Revised Draft General Plan 2035, Noise and Air Quality Element, November 2021. Accessed
May 10, 2022 via https://www.cityofmartinez.org/home/showpublisheddocument/2069/637816480405730000.
445
7
Future Interior Noise Environment
The City of Martinez requires interior noise levels to be maintained at or below 45 dBA Ldn to be
considered acceptable for residential development. In residential units of standard construction,
interior noise levels are approximately 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels with the
windows partially open. Standard construction with forced air ventilation (allowing the occupant
to control noise by maintaining the windows shut) provides approximately 20 to 25 dBA of noise
reduction in interior spaces. This method of reducing interior noise levels is normally used in noise
environments ranging from 60 to 65 dBA Ldn. Where noise levels exceed 65 dBA Ldn, forced-air
mechanical ventilation systems and sound-rated construction methods are normally required.
Unshielded second- and third-story façades of the apartment building would be exposed to future
noise levels up to 69 dBA Ldn. Calculations were made to estimate the transmission loss provided
by the proposed building elements to determine the expected interior noise levels resulting from
traffic. Interior noise levels were calculated based on a review of the project’s site plan, exterior
building elevations, and floor plans. The relative areas of walls, windows, and doors were input
into an acoustical model to calculate interior noise levels within the proposed residential building.
Based on typical California construction techniques, the analysis assumed that the proposed
residences would have a three-coat stucco exterior siding (7/8-in.) over Tyvek, 1/2-in. CDX
plywood, wood stud framing, R22 cavity insulation, and a single layer of 5/8-in.gypsum board at
the interior face. The sound isolation rating of this exterior wall assembly would be STC 46.
Windows and doors were then tested to determine the necessary sound transmission class ratings
of these building elements in order to reduce interior noise levels due to traffic to acceptable levels.
The calculations showed that standard thermal-pane residential windows/doors with a minimum
rating of STC 26 would be required. All residential units should be mechanically ventilated by
some form of forced-air mechanical ventilation, satisfactory to the local building official, to allow
occupants the option of closing the windows and doors to control noise.
446
8 FIGURE 1 Aerial Image Showing Noise Measurement Locations Source: Google Earth 2022. 447
9 448
10 449
11 450
12 451
13 452
14 453
AERIAL MAP
0 PACHECO BLVD, MARTINEZ, CA
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAP
SUBJECT PROPERTY
WINDHOVER TERRACE APARTMENTS
APN: 380-220-066
G:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\00_WINDHOVER G1_GENERAL_TITLE SHT_11MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 3:03 PMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COM10-19-2021
G1GENERAL TITLE SHEET NONE
ABBREVIATIONS
FND
AND&
AT@
FLOORFLR
CEILING
TO BE VERIFIEDTBV
VERTICALVERT
WITHOUTW/O
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
WITH
WITHIN
UBC
UON
W/
W/I
ADDITIONALADDL
CLG
UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWNUOS
VERIFY IN FIELDVIF
ABOVEABV
ROOFRF
DRAWING(S)DWG
NEW
NOT TO SCALE
(N)
NTS
CNR CORNER
CONT CONTINUOUS
CONC CONCRETE
DELETEDEL
DOUBLEDBL
DETAILDET / DTL
EACHEA
ELEVATIONELEV
FINISH/FINISHINGFIN
EXISTING(E)
FOUNDATION
HEIGHTHT
HORIZONTALHORIZ
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF
BUILDING OFFICIALSICBO
INTERIOR, INTERSECTIONINT
MINIMUMMIN
MAXIMUMMAX
SQUARESQ
STANDARDSTD
EXTERIOREXT
EXTENDETD
CBC CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE
14. PROVIDE SAFETY GLAZING AT SPECIFIC
LOCATIONS ON PLANS WHERE BOTTOM OF
WINDOW WILL BE LESS THAN 60" ABOVE A
STANDING SURFACE AND DRAIN INLET.
8. VERIFY ALL FINISH MATERIALS WITH
OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
7. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE FROM FACE OF
STUD TO FACE OF STUD U.O.N.
6. PROVIDE BACKING FOR ALL TOWEL BARS
AND TISSUE HOLDERS IN BATHROOMS, TYP.
5. ALL ANGLES OTHER THAN 90°
SHALL BE 45° U.O.N.
4. ALL WALLS OVER 10'0" TALL SHALL BE
2x6 STUDS @ 16" O.C. MINIMUM, WITH
FIRE BLOCKING @ 10'-0" INTERVALS
3. ALL EXTERIOR DOORS AND WINDOWS
SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY OR
COUNTY SECURITY ORDINANCE.
2. ALL WALLS WITH SHEAR PLYWOOD SHALL
HAVE A CONTINUOUS FLUSH FINISH. FURR
WALLS OR CONTINUE PLYWD. TO MAINTAIN
THE REQUIRED FLUSH FINISH
1. INSTALL WATER RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD
(FULL HEIGHT) AROUND ALL SHOWER
ENCLOSURES AND BEHIND ALL PLUMBING
FIXTURES, EXCEPT BEHIND TILE, INSTALL
DUROC, WONDERBOARD, OR SIM. PRODUCT.
9. CEILING HEIGHTS ARE MEASURED FROM
TOP OF SUBFLOOR, TYP.
10. ALL TEMPERED GLASS SHALL BE AFFIXED
W/ A PERMANENT LABEL.
11. SHOWERS AND TUB/SHOWER FIXTURES
SHALL BE EQUIPPED W/ A PRESSURE
BALANCE OR THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVE.
12. ALL WINDOWS IN SLEEPING ROOMS
SHALL HAVE SILL HEIGHTS NOT MORE
THAN 44-INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR AND
OPEN DIRECTLY TO STREETS, PUBLIC
ALLEYS, YARDS, OR EXIT COUNTY.
13. ALL DOORS SHALL BE FRAMED WITH 4"
JAMBS, TYP. U.O.N.
Owner:INDEX TO DRAWINGS
GENERAL TITLE SHEETG1
GENERAL NOTES
·2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)
·2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC)
·2019 MECAHNICAL CODE (CMC)
·2019 PLUMBING CODE (CPC)
·2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC)
·2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE (CEnC)
·CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MUNICIPAL CODE
Civil Engineer:
Architectural Designer:
Landscape Architect:
Soils Engineer:
Bear Engineering
3530 Kevin Place
Concord, Ca
(925)978-9754
Smith+Smith
1501 North Point Street
San Francisco, Ca
(415)543-0332
Norcal Design
1501 North Point Street
San Francisco, Ca
(415)295-2012
Calichi Design Group Civil Engineers
3240 Peralta Street, #3
Oakland, Ca 94560
(510)250-7877
www.calichi.com
West Coast Land and
Development, Inc.
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, Ca
(925)246-2870
2ND FLOOR PLANA2
ELEVATIONS
A3
1ST FLOOR PLANA1
COLOR BOARDCB1
CODES IN EFFECT
0 PACHECO BLVD
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
BUILDING DATA
APN: 380-220-066
SIZE: 0.75 ACRES
ZONING:M-29
EXISTING STRUCTURES: NONE
PROPOSED STRUCTURES:
24 UNIT BUILDING WITH ASSOCIATED
IMPROVEMENTS
SIZE:22,247 SQFT LIVING AREA
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT ADDRESS:
LEGAL OWNER:PROPOSED AREA:
WEST COAST LAND AND
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
145 JOHN GLEN DRIVE
CONCORD, CA 94520
ZONING REQUIREMENTS
MAX. ALLOWED PROPOSED
30'-0"37.5'
SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
FRONT / SIDE / REAR / PARKING
25' MIN. / 20'-0" / 20'-0" / 25'-0"
MAIN STRUCTURES BUILDING HEIGHT
PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE
BUILDING FOOTPRINT ---------------
COVERED PARKING ------------------
TRASH ENCLOSURE------------------------
TOTAL--------
LOT COVERAGE:
ALLOWED 32830 x .35 = 11,490 SQ. FT.
7,389 SQ. FT.
2,969 SQ. FT.
276 SQ. FT.
10,619 SQ.FT.
BUILDING 1ST FLOOR ------------------------------
BUILDING 2ND FLOOR -----------------------------
BUILDING 3ND FLOOR -----------------------------
COVERED PARKING --------------------------------
TRASH ENCLOSURE --------------------------------
BIKE LOCKERS ----------------------------------------
LOT SIZE -----------------------------------------------
7,389 SQ.FT.
7,429 SQ.FT.
7,429 SQ. FT.
2,650 SQ.FT.
276 SQ.FT.
76 SQ.FT.
32,830 SQ.FT.
SUBJECT PROPERTY
WINDHOVER WAYSUBJECT PROPERTY
WINDHOVER WAYPA
C
H
E
C
O
B
L
V
D
PARKING PROPOSED:
TREES TO BE REMOVED:
16 Covered
(2 ADA
4 EV Spaces)
13 Uncovered
4 Guest Parking
33 Total Parking
9 Total, 1 Protected
PROPOSED
FRONT / SIDE / REAR / PARKING
48' / 20'/82' / 20' / 17.5'
REQUIRED PROPOSED
25%20%
OPEN SPACE
SITE, PAVING, HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLANC1.0
FIRE PROTECTION EXHIBITC1.1
GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANC2.0
UTILITY PLANC3.0
STORMWATER CONTROL PLANC4.0
LANDSCAPE PLANL-1
LANDSCAPE FURNITURE & PLANTING IMAGESL-2
PQR
A4
3RD FLOOR PLAN
PERMIT#: CDDP21-03031
454
455
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVUPUPUPUPPROPOSED
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FOOTPRINT = 7,470± SF
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
SITE, PAVING, AND
HORIZONTAL
CONTROL PLAN
C1.0
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTINGGENERAL NOTES:
ENGINEER'S ADA NOTES:
SITE PLAN KEY NOTES
SITE INFORMATION:
456
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVUPUPUPUPPROPOSED
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FOOTPRINT = 7,470± SF
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
FIRE
PROTECTION
EXHIBIT
C1.1
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
FIRE PLAN LEGEND
457
UPUPUPUPCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVSEE DETAIL 1,
THIS SHEET
SEE DETAIL 2,
THIS SHEET
SEE DETAIL 4,
THIS SHEET
PROPOSED MULTI RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FFE=40.50'
PAD=39.50'±
PROPOSED MULTI RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FFE=40.50'
PAD=39.50'±
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
SEE DETAIL 3,
THIS SHEET
EVEVEVCOMPACTCOMPACT BED RM 1 14'-0" X11'-9" BED RM 2 10'-6" X11'-9" BED RM 1 14'-0" X11'-9" BED RM 2 10'-6" X11'-9"EVEVGRADING AND
DRAINAGE PLAN
C2.0
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
GRADING NOTES:
SPOT GRADING LEGEND
EARTHWORK EG TO FG CALCULATIONS
DETAIL 2DETAIL 1
DETAIL 3
DETAIL 4
458
UPUPUPUPPROPOSED
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FOOTPRINT = 7,470± SF
UTILITY PLAN
C3.0
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
WATER KEY NOTES
SANITARY SEWER KEY NOTES
DRY UTILITY KEY NOTES
GAS SERVICE KEY NOTES
UTILITY NOTES:
STORM DRAIN KEY NOTES
459
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVUPUPUPUPLIMIT OF
DISTURBANCE
STORM WATER
CONTROL PLAN
C4.0
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
ON-SITE BIORETENTION FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN
STORMWATER CONTROL LEGEND
460
1ST FLOOR
UP
UP
UP
UP
BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 7
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 8
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 2
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 1
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
ENTRY
ENTRY
ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 4 ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 5 ENTRY
ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 3
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
70 S.F.
3
A3
1
A3
4
A3
2
A3
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
139'-10 1/8"53'-6 1/2"14'-8 1/4"5'-11"14'-9"10'-5 7/8"15'-1 1/4"15'-1 1/4"
51'-2 3/8"
9'-1 3/4"
44'-1 5/8"14'-7 5/8"2'-8"12'-1 1/8"BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 6
ENTRY
CLOSET
ENTRY
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
H/W H/W REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:08 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA1FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW
REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET “C-1' FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
REFER TO ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL
SWITCHES, LIGHTS, RECEPTACLES, SMOKE
DETECTORS, ETC.
SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY WIRED
AND SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH 24 HOUR BATTERY
BACKUP.
DUCT PIERCING WALL BETWEEN HOUSE LIVING AREA
AND GARAGE SHALL BE 26GA G.I. MATERIAL IN THE
GARAGE, SEALED AT EDGES, AND NO OPENINGS INTO
GARAGE, SEC 302.4.
EVERY SLEEPING ROOM SHALL HAVE. AT LEAST ONE
EXTERIOR DOOR OR WINDOW APPROVED FOR
EMERGENCY ESCAPE/RESCUE. IT SHALL HAVE THE
FOLLOWING:
A.A MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENING OF 5.7 SQ. FT.
B. A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING HEIGHT OF 24
INCHES.
C.A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING WIDTH OF 20
INCHES.
D.A MAXIMUM FINISHED SILL HEIGHT OF 44
INCHES.
E. BARS, GRILLES OR GRATES SHALL HAVE
APPROVED RELEASE MECHANISMS (UBC 310.4)
EXTERIOR WALL - EXTERIOR FACE: 7/8” 3-COAT
STUCCO OVER TYVEK, ½ CDX PLYWOOD, 2X6 WOOD
STUDS @ 16” O.C., R-22 HIGH DENSITY INSULATION,
INTERIOR FACE: 5/8 GYP, BD, TAPE & TEXTURE LEVEL
5 FINISH.
INTERIOR WALLS - 2X4 STUDS @ 16” O.C. WITH 5/8
GYP, BD, EACH SIDE. TAPE & TEXTURE LEVEL 5 FINISH.
R-13 AT BATHROOM U.O.N.
PLUMBING WALL - 2X6 STUDS @ 16” O.C. WITH 5/8”
WP. GYP. BD. ON WET SIDE AND 5/8 GYP. BD. ON DRY
SIDE TAPE & TEXTURE LEVEL 5 FINISH. PROVIDE
CEMENT BACKER BD AT TILE INSTALLATIONS R-19
BATT INSULATION AT BATHROOM.
FLOOR PLAN NOTES:
THE FOLLOWING ARE PROVIDED IN EACH UNIT:
24” DEEP BASE CABINET WITH 36” HIGH
COUNTERTOP AND SPLASH.
36” HIGH ISLAND CABINET WITH COUNTERTOP.
13” DEEP OVERHEAD CABINET.
TWO COMPARTMENT SINK WITH GARBAGE DISPOSAL
- VERIFY DIMENSIONS IN MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS.
30” SLIDE- IN RANGE/OVEN WITH MICROWAVE LIGHT
AND EXHAUST FAN ABOVE (DUCT TO OUTSIDE AIR) -
VERIFY DIMENSIONS & REQUIRED CLEARANCES WITH
MANUFACTUERE'S SPECIFICATIONS PRIOR TO
FABRICATING CABINETS.
36” CLEAR REFRIGERATOR SPACE - PROVIDE
PLUMBING FOR ICEMAKER (RELEASED ON WALL).
24” DEEP COUNTERTOP AND SPLASH.
BUILT-IN PANTRY W/ SHELEVES.
32” X 60” ENAMELED STEEL TUB AND SHOWER WITH
APPROVED FINISH (3) WALLS TO 80” ABOVE FLOOR -
PROVIDE CLEAR TEMPERED GLASS ENCLOSURE AND
DOOR (DOOR SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL TOWER BAR) -
ALL SHOWER AND TUB/SHOWER COMBINATIONS ARE
REQUIRED TO HAVE A THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVE
TYPE OR INDIVIDUAL CONTROL VALVES OF THE
PRESSURE BALANCE TYPE PER (UPC 410.7).
WASHER SPACE PROVIDE PLUMBING CONNECTIONS
(WASTE AND WATER) RECESSED WALL.
DRYER SPACE- PROVIDE SMOOTH METAL DRYER VENT
WITH BACKDRAFT DAMPER - VENT TO OUTSIDE AIR.
LENGTH OF CLOTHES DRYER VENT NOT TO EXCEED 14
FT. WITH MAXIMUM OF TWO 90 DEGREE TURNS.
TERMINATION TO BE 4”-0” - MINIMUM CLEAR FROM
PROPERTY LINE.
SHELF AND POLE.
SHELF AND DOUBLE POLE.
PROVIDE (1) LAYER OF 5/8” TYPE “X” GYP. BD. AT ALL
WALLS AND CEILING OF GARAGE.
PROVIDE MECHANICAL VENTILATION THIS ROOM
CAPABLE OF PROVIDING FIVE AIR CHANGES PER HOUR
- REFER TO ELCTRICAL DRAWINGS.
GAS WATER HEATER ON 18” HIGH PLYWOOD
PLATFORM - PROVIDE SEISMIC STRAPS AT POINTS
WITHIN THE UPPER AND LOWER ONE - THIRD OF ITS
VERTICAL DIMENSION. THE LOWER ANCHOR/STRAP
LOCATED TO MAINTAIN A DISTANCE OF 4 INCHES
ABOVE THE CONTROLS AND INSULATION PER TITLE
-24 ENERGY CALCS- PROVIDE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE
WITH 1/2” COPPER DRAIN TO OUTSIDE. (PRIDE
WATER HEATER VENT THROUGH ROOF) & 12”X12”
LOUVER T&B.
FORCED AIR UNIT IN ATTIC- PROVIDE LIGHT, SWITCH,
110V RECEPTABLE AND FUEL GAS PER CMC SEC 319.
PROVIDE 22”X30” ATTIC ACCESS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
NOTES
461
2nd FLOOR
BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 15 W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 16
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 10W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 9
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN KITCHEN
ENTRY
ENTRY
UNIT 12 UNIT 13
ENTRY
UNIT 11
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
70 S.F.
3
A3
1
A3
4
A3
2
A3
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
139'-10 1/8"53'-6 1/2"14'-8 1/4"5'-11"14'-9"9'-1 3/4"14'-7 5/8"2'-8"12'-1 1/8"BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN
UNIT 14
ENTRY
CLOSET
ENTRY
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
H/W H/W
H/W H/W
15'-1 1/4"
40'-8 3/8"
10'-6"10'-6"
51'-2 3/8"
15'-1 1/4"
UP
UP
UP
UP REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:08 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA2SECOND FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW
462
3rd FLOOR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 23 W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 24
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 18W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 17
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN
ENTRY
ENTRY
UNIT 20
UNIT 21
ENTRY
UNIT 19
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
70 S.F.
3
A3
1
A3
4
A3
2
A3
139'-10 1/8"53'-6 1/2"14'-8 1/4"5'-11"14'-9"9'-1 3/4"14'-7 5/8"2'-8"12'-1 1/8"BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
UNIT 22
ENTRY
CLOSET
ENTRY
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
H/W H/W
H/W H/W
15'-1 1/4"
40'-8 3/8"
10'-6"10'-6"
51'-2 3/8"
15'-1 1/4"
UP
UP
UP
UP
KITCHENKITCHEN
KITCHEN REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:08 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA3THIRD FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW
463
10'-0"10'-0"REAR ELEVATION (EAST)
OPEN OPEN
OPENOPEN
10'-0"10'-0"FRONT ELEVATION (WEST)
OPENOPEN
OPEN OPEN10'-0"10'-0"LEFT ELEVATION (NORTH)10'-0"10'-0"RIGHT ELEVATION (SOUTH)
2
13
4 SCALE: 1 8"=1'SCALE: 1 8"=1'
SCALE: 1 8"=1'SCALE: 1 8"=1'7'-6"9'-8"18'-0"27'-0"27'-0"27'-0"27'-0"
6 COVERED PARKING CANOPY & TRASH ENCLOSURE SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
GRADE
126'-0"7'-6"9'-8"16'-0"
19'-0"
COVERED PARKING FRONT (REAR SIM)
COVERED PARKING END 1'-0"1'-0"1'-0"33'-0"33'-0"33'-0"33'-0"36'-6"36'-6"38'-6"38'-6"36'-6"36'-6"38'-6"1'2'-6"34'-0"38'-6"4'-6"1'2'-6"34'-0"2'-6"(E) NATURAL GRADE1'2'-6"1'4'-6"4'-6"34'-0"34'-0"(E) NATURAL GRADE
4'-6"16'-2"7'-0"8'-8"19'-1"
16'-2"
19'-1"7'-0"8'-8"TRASH ENCLOSURE FRONT TRASH ENCLOSURE REAR (SIDE SIM.)10'-8"1'-0"3'-0"7'-6"9'-8"13'-7"(E) NATURAL GRADE
(E) NATURAL GRADE
(E) NATURAL GRADE
OPEN OPEN
OPENOPEN 10'-0"10'-0"1'-0"10'-0"10'-0"REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:13 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA4ELEVATIONS 1/8"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW11-19-2021PQR3-COAT STUCCO W. INTERGRAL COLOR O/ TYVEK & BLDG. PAPER
O/ ½” CDX PLYWOOD
2X4 PAINTED WOOD TRIM
2X10 PAINTED WOOD FASCIA W/ SHEET METAL GUTTER
2X WOOD BRACKETS
CLAY TILE CFAPS & PANS O/ 30LB. FELT O/PLYWOOD SUVSTARTE
ON FRAMING, SLOPE 6:12-SEE STRUCTURAL.
STUCCO WEEP SCREED
CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE (SEE STRUC.)
VINYL WINDOWS MFR'S WHITE W/ 1X4 PAINTED WOOD TRIM
VENT FLUE 24' ABOVE ANY POINT WIHTIN A 10”-0” RADIUS
SKYLIGHT ON 4” CURB.
STUCCO WRAPPED COLUMN
PATIO VINYL DOOR W/ CONCRETE LANDING
FINISH GRADE - SEE GRADING PLAN
42” HIGH WROUGHT IRON RAILING WITH CAP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
SHEET NOTES
464
465
466
FRONT ELEVATION (WEST)
21 3 WINDOWS: VINYL STYLE
ANDERSEN "SAND"
HARDIESHINGLE
"PEARL GRAY"
7/8" STUCCO -3 COAT :
BEHR "SANDSTONE"
OPENOPEN
OPEN OPEN
OPENOPEN REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\02_WINDHOVER CB1 _ COLOR BOARD_10MAR2022.DWG 3/11/2022 10:46 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDrawn By: PQR
of Sheet
Sheet
Job
SCALE
DATE 3-10-2022 (925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMNTS
CB1COLOR BOARD467
WINDHOVER TERRACE APARTMENTS PROJECT
COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031
County Planning
Commission
August 9, 2023
468
AERIAL VIEW
469
General Plan: MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-HIGH DENSITY (MH)
470
Zoning: M-29 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
471
SITE PHOTOS
472
Project Description
Development Plan:
■Approximately 22,247-square-foot, 24-unit apartment building
■Covered carports
■Site improvements – pavement, utilities, stormwater conveyance, landscaping. etc
■Two units for low-income households
■One unit for very low -income households
Tree Permit for the removal of four (4) code-protected trees:
■London Plane, Carolina Cherry Laurel, California Black Walnut, Glossy Privet
Variance Requests:
■38’ – 6” height (where 30’ is the maximum)
■24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the
minimum)
Other Requests:
■Density Bonus of 2 additional units
■Concession to reduce Open Space requirement
■Parking ratios per Government Code 65915(p)
■Reduced parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces per Government Code 65915(e)
■Exception to Division 914, Collect and Convey 473
PROJECT DRAWINGS
474
Site Plan:
475
Floor Plan: First
Floor
Two -
bedroom
unit
4 units 830 sq
ft
One-
bedroom
unit
4 units 650 sq
ft
Red Box Inclusionary Housing Unit
Green Box One Bedroom Unit
Blue Box Two Bedroom Unit 476
Floor Plan: Second
Floor
Two -
bedroom
unit
4 units 830 sq
ft
One-
bedroom
unit
4 units 650 sq
ft
477
Floor Plan: Third
Floor
Two -
bedroom
unit
4 units 830 sq
ft
One-
bedroom
unit
4 units 650 sq
ft
478
Elevations: Proposed
479
Environmental Review (MND)
The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for the project identified potential
environmental impacts in the areas of:
■Aesthetics
■Air Quality
■Cultural Resources
■Geology/Soils
■Noise
■Tribal Cultural Resources
The MND found that no significant environmental impacts will be created by the proposed 24-unit
apartment project with the enforcement of the stated mitigation measures.
480
Background ■A Development Plan application with a
Variance Permit and a Tree Permit was
initially submitted on October 12, 2021.
■The matter was initially heard by the
County Zoning Administrator on February
22, 2023. The County Zoning
Administrator approved the Development
Plan, Variance Permit and Tree Permit
with modifications and added conditions
of approval.
■Staff received one letter from Joe Hise on
February 27, 2023, appealing the Zoning
Administrator’s decision.
481
Appeal Points
(summary)
As the basis for their appeal, the appellant mentioned various concerns such as:
–Project does not meet certain sections of the Zoning Code
–Concerns regarding CEQA
–Concerns regarding the Sanitary District
–Concerns over drainage issues
–Concerns over tree removal
–Concerns over proposed parking for project
–Concerns over noise
–Concerns over property values
–Concerns that the project has an adverse impact
–Concerns over increased traffic
482
Appeal Points
■The applicant is allowed to request
Variances for certain sections of the
Zoning Code and Staff has made the
findings to support the Variances.
■The County prepared an Initial Study
which found no significant environmental
impacts with mitigation measures.
■Applicant is required to obtain Sanitary
District approval.
■Project is required to comply with
Division 914 of County Ordinance Code.
Project does not meet certain sections of the Zoning Code
Concerns regarding CEQA
Concerns regarding the Sanitary District
Concerns over drainage issues
483
Appeal Points
■Applicant is proposing to keep the tree in
question.
■Applicant is requesting reduced parking
under Government Code 69515(p) and
65915(e).
■Noise assessment study was prepared
indicating future noise is acceptable and
mitigation measures are included: Noise
1 and Noise 2.
■Building on a vacant lot will increase
property value by providing additional
housing stock
Concerns over tree removal
Concerns over proposed parking for project
Concerns over noise
Concerns over property values
484
Appeal Points
■Project was reviewed by multiple
agencies and is consistent with the
zoning ordinance and general plan land
use designation and CEQA.
■Transportation Impact Analysis study was
prepared stating that the project would
have a less than significant VMT impact
and a COA for a detailed traffic analysis
will be required.
Concerns that the project has an adverse impact
Concerns over increased traffic
485
Staff Conclusion
■The project is consistent with the applicable policies/standards of:
–County General Plan
–Zoning Consistency
■The environmental analysis found no significant impact on the environment
with the incorporation of specific mitigations.
■The project will provide additional needed housing and affordable housing
units.
486
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission:
■OPEN the public hearing, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing.
■DENY the appeal by Joe Hise, et al.
■FIND that the mitigated negative declaration prepared for the project adequately
analyzes the project’s environmental impacts, that there is no substantial evidence
that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, and that the
mitigated negative declaration reflects the County’s independent judgement and
analysis.
■ADOPT the mitigated negative declaration (State Clearing House No. 2023070169)
prepared for the project.
■ADOPT the mitigation monitoring program for the project.
487
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission:
■DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to file a CEQA Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk.
■SPECIFY that the Department of Conservation and Development, located at 30 Muir
Road, Martinez, California, is the custodian of the document and other material that
constitutes the record of proceedings upon which the decision of the Board of
Supervisors is based.
■APPROVE a variance to allow a building height of 38’-6” (where 30’ is the maximum
allowed) and a driveway aisle width of 24 ’-6” (where 25’ is minimum required).
■APPROVE a density bonus to allow two additional units (for a total of 24 units), the
requested concession to reduce the open space requirement, and the requested
reduction in development standards related to parking stall size, parking setbacks,
and number of covered parking spaces.
488
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission:
■APPROVE the Development Plan for the project, including the associated tree permit
and requested exception from Title 9 offsite collect and convey requirements.
■APPROVE the findings in support of the project.
■APPROVE the project conditions of approval.
■APPROVE the Windhover Terrace Apartments Project.
489
QUESTIONS?
490
AERIAL MAP
0 PACHECO BLVD, MARTINEZ, CA
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAP
SUBJECT PROPERTY
WINDHOVER TERRACE APARTMENTS
APN: 380-220-066
G:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\00_WINDHOVER G1_GENERAL_TITLE SHT_11MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 3:03 PMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COM10-19-2021
G1GENERAL TITLE SHEET NONE
ABBREVIATIONS
FND
AND&
AT@
FLOORFLR
CEILING
TO BE VERIFIEDTBV
VERTICALVERT
WITHOUTW/O
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
WITH
WITHIN
UBC
UON
W/
W/I
ADDITIONALADDL
CLG
UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWNUOS
VERIFY IN FIELDVIF
ABOVEABV
ROOFRF
DRAWING(S)DWG
NEW
NOT TO SCALE
(N)
NTS
CNR CORNER
CONT CONTINUOUS
CONC CONCRETE
DELETEDEL
DOUBLEDBL
DETAILDET / DTL
EACHEA
ELEVATIONELEV
FINISH/FINISHINGFIN
EXISTING(E)
FOUNDATION
HEIGHTHT
HORIZONTALHORIZ
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF
BUILDING OFFICIALSICBO
INTERIOR, INTERSECTIONINT
MINIMUMMIN
MAXIMUMMAX
SQUARESQ
STANDARDSTD
EXTERIOREXT
EXTENDETD
CBC CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE
14. PROVIDE SAFETY GLAZING AT SPECIFIC
LOCATIONS ON PLANS WHERE BOTTOM OF
WINDOW WILL BE LESS THAN 60" ABOVE A
STANDING SURFACE AND DRAIN INLET.
8. VERIFY ALL FINISH MATERIALS WITH
OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
7. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE FROM FACE OF
STUD TO FACE OF STUD U.O.N.
6. PROVIDE BACKING FOR ALL TOWEL BARS
AND TISSUE HOLDERS IN BATHROOMS, TYP.
5. ALL ANGLES OTHER THAN 90°
SHALL BE 45° U.O.N.
4. ALL WALLS OVER 10'0" TALL SHALL BE
2x6 STUDS @ 16" O.C. MINIMUM, WITH
FIRE BLOCKING @ 10'-0" INTERVALS
3. ALL EXTERIOR DOORS AND WINDOWS
SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY OR
COUNTY SECURITY ORDINANCE.
2. ALL WALLS WITH SHEAR PLYWOOD SHALL
HAVE A CONTINUOUS FLUSH FINISH. FURR
WALLS OR CONTINUE PLYWD. TO MAINTAIN
THE REQUIRED FLUSH FINISH
1. INSTALL WATER RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD
(FULL HEIGHT) AROUND ALL SHOWER
ENCLOSURES AND BEHIND ALL PLUMBING
FIXTURES, EXCEPT BEHIND TILE, INSTALL
DUROC, WONDERBOARD, OR SIM. PRODUCT.
9. CEILING HEIGHTS ARE MEASURED FROM
TOP OF SUBFLOOR, TYP.
10. ALL TEMPERED GLASS SHALL BE AFFIXED
W/ A PERMANENT LABEL.
11. SHOWERS AND TUB/SHOWER FIXTURES
SHALL BE EQUIPPED W/ A PRESSURE
BALANCE OR THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVE.
12. ALL WINDOWS IN SLEEPING ROOMS
SHALL HAVE SILL HEIGHTS NOT MORE
THAN 44-INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR AND
OPEN DIRECTLY TO STREETS, PUBLIC
ALLEYS, YARDS, OR EXIT COUNTY.
13. ALL DOORS SHALL BE FRAMED WITH 4"
JAMBS, TYP. U.O.N.
Owner:INDEX TO DRAWINGS
GENERAL TITLE SHEETG1
GENERAL NOTES
·2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)
·2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC)
·2019 MECAHNICAL CODE (CMC)
·2019 PLUMBING CODE (CPC)
·2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC)
·2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE (CEnC)
·CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MUNICIPAL CODE
Civil Engineer:
Architectural Designer:
Landscape Architect:
Soils Engineer:
Bear Engineering
3530 Kevin Place
Concord, Ca
(925)978-9754
Smith+Smith
1501 North Point Street
San Francisco, Ca
(415)543-0332
Norcal Design
1501 North Point Street
San Francisco, Ca
(415)295-2012
Calichi Design Group Civil Engineers
3240 Peralta Street, #3
Oakland, Ca 94560
(510)250-7877
www.calichi.com
West Coast Land and
Development, Inc.
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, Ca
(925)246-2870
2ND FLOOR PLANA2
ELEVATIONS
A3
1ST FLOOR PLANA1
COLOR BOARDCB1
CODES IN EFFECT
0 PACHECO BLVD
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
BUILDING DATA
APN: 380-220-066
SIZE: 0.75 ACRES
ZONING:M-29
EXISTING STRUCTURES: NONE
PROPOSED STRUCTURES:
24 UNIT BUILDING WITH ASSOCIATED
IMPROVEMENTS
SIZE:22,247 SQFT LIVING AREA
VICINITY MAP
PROJECT ADDRESS:
LEGAL OWNER:PROPOSED AREA:
WEST COAST LAND AND
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
145 JOHN GLEN DRIVE
CONCORD, CA 94520
ZONING REQUIREMENTS
MAX. ALLOWED PROPOSED
30'-0"37.5'
SETBACK REQUIREMENTS
FRONT / SIDE / REAR / PARKING
25' MIN. / 20'-0" / 20'-0" / 25'-0"
MAIN STRUCTURES BUILDING HEIGHT
PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE
BUILDING FOOTPRINT ---------------
COVERED PARKING ------------------
TRASH ENCLOSURE------------------------
TOTAL--------
LOT COVERAGE:
ALLOWED 32830 x .35 = 11,490 SQ. FT.
7,389 SQ. FT.
2,969 SQ. FT.
276 SQ. FT.
10,619 SQ.FT.
BUILDING 1ST FLOOR ------------------------------
BUILDING 2ND FLOOR -----------------------------
BUILDING 3ND FLOOR -----------------------------
COVERED PARKING --------------------------------
TRASH ENCLOSURE --------------------------------
BIKE LOCKERS ----------------------------------------
LOT SIZE -----------------------------------------------
7,389 SQ.FT.
7,429 SQ.FT.
7,429 SQ. FT.
2,650 SQ.FT.
276 SQ.FT.
76 SQ.FT.
32,830 SQ.FT.
SUBJECT PROPERTY
WINDHOVER WAYSUBJECT PROPERTY
WINDHOVER WAYPA
C
H
E
C
O
B
L
V
D
PARKING PROPOSED:
TREES TO BE REMOVED:
16 Covered
(2 ADA
4 EV Spaces)
13 Uncovered
4 Guest Parking
33 Total Parking
9 Total, 1 Protected
PROPOSED
FRONT / SIDE / REAR / PARKING
48' / 20'/82' / 20' / 17.5'
REQUIRED PROPOSED
25%20%
OPEN SPACE
SITE, PAVING, HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLANC1.0
FIRE PROTECTION EXHIBITC1.1
GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANC2.0
UTILITY PLANC3.0
STORMWATER CONTROL PLANC4.0
LANDSCAPE PLANL-1
LANDSCAPE FURNITURE & PLANTING IMAGESL-2
PQR
A4
3RD FLOOR PLAN
PERMIT#: CDDP21-03031
491
492
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVUPUPUPUPPROPOSED
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FOOTPRINT = 7,470± SF
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
SITE, PAVING, AND
HORIZONTAL
CONTROL PLAN
C1.0
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTINGGENERAL NOTES:
ENGINEER'S ADA NOTES:
SITE PLAN KEY NOTES
SITE INFORMATION:
493
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVUPUPUPUPPROPOSED
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FOOTPRINT = 7,470± SF
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
FIRE
PROTECTION
EXHIBIT
C1.1
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
FIRE PLAN LEGEND
494
UPUPUPUPCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVSEE DETAIL 1,
THIS SHEET
SEE DETAIL 2,
THIS SHEET
SEE DETAIL 4,
THIS SHEET
PROPOSED MULTI RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FFE=40.50'
PAD=39.50'±
PROPOSED MULTI RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FFE=40.50'
PAD=39.50'±
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
SEE DETAIL 3,
THIS SHEET
EVEVEVCOMPACTCOMPACT BED RM 1 14'-0" X11'-9" BED RM 2 10'-6" X11'-9" BED RM 1 14'-0" X11'-9" BED RM 2 10'-6" X11'-9"EVEVGRADING AND
DRAINAGE PLAN
C2.0
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
GRADING NOTES:
SPOT GRADING LEGEND
EARTHWORK EG TO FG CALCULATIONS
DETAIL 2DETAIL 1
DETAIL 3
DETAIL 4
495
UPUPUPUPPROPOSED
MULTI-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
FOOTPRINT = 7,470± SF
UTILITY PLAN
C3.0
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
WATER KEY NOTES
SANITARY SEWER KEY NOTES
DRY UTILITY KEY NOTES
GAS SERVICE KEY NOTES
UTILITY NOTES:
STORM DRAIN KEY NOTES
496
COMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTCOMPACTEVEVEVEVUPUPUPUPLIMIT OF
DISTURBANCE
STORM WATER
CONTROL PLAN
C4.0
2022/03/15GULWAY APARTMENTSWINDHOVER WAYAPN: 380-220-066MARTINEZ, CACALICHI DESIGN GROUP
CIVIL ENGINEERS
3240 PERALTA STREET, #3
OAKLAND, CA 9460
(510) 250-7877
WWW.CALICHI.COM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
19/08/22SCP
SUBMITTAL
19/10/08PLANNING
RESUBMITTAL
22/03/15PLANNING
R2
PROPOSED LEGEND EXISTING
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
ON-SITE BIORETENTION FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN
STORMWATER CONTROL LEGEND
497
1ST FLOOR
UP
UP
UP
UP
BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 7
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 8
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 2
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
ACCESSIBLE
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 1
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
ENTRY
ENTRY
ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 4 ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 5 ENTRY
ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 3
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
70 S.F.
3
A3
1
A3
4
A3
2
A3
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
139'-10 1/8"53'-6 1/2"14'-8 1/4"5'-11"14'-9"10'-5 7/8"15'-1 1/4"15'-1 1/4"
51'-2 3/8"
9'-1 3/4"
44'-1 5/8"14'-7 5/8"2'-8"12'-1 1/8"BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
ACCESSIBLE
UNIT 6
ENTRY
CLOSET
ENTRY
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
KITCHEN
H/W H/W REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:08 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA1FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW
REFER TO GENERAL NOTES SHEET “C-1' FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
REFER TO ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL
SWITCHES, LIGHTS, RECEPTACLES, SMOKE
DETECTORS, ETC.
SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY WIRED
AND SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH 24 HOUR BATTERY
BACKUP.
DUCT PIERCING WALL BETWEEN HOUSE LIVING AREA
AND GARAGE SHALL BE 26GA G.I. MATERIAL IN THE
GARAGE, SEALED AT EDGES, AND NO OPENINGS INTO
GARAGE, SEC 302.4.
EVERY SLEEPING ROOM SHALL HAVE. AT LEAST ONE
EXTERIOR DOOR OR WINDOW APPROVED FOR
EMERGENCY ESCAPE/RESCUE. IT SHALL HAVE THE
FOLLOWING:
A.A MINIMUM NET CLEAR OPENING OF 5.7 SQ. FT.
B. A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING HEIGHT OF 24
INCHES.
C.A MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING WIDTH OF 20
INCHES.
D.A MAXIMUM FINISHED SILL HEIGHT OF 44
INCHES.
E. BARS, GRILLES OR GRATES SHALL HAVE
APPROVED RELEASE MECHANISMS (UBC 310.4)
EXTERIOR WALL - EXTERIOR FACE: 7/8” 3-COAT
STUCCO OVER TYVEK, ½ CDX PLYWOOD, 2X6 WOOD
STUDS @ 16” O.C., R-22 HIGH DENSITY INSULATION,
INTERIOR FACE: 5/8 GYP, BD, TAPE & TEXTURE LEVEL
5 FINISH.
INTERIOR WALLS - 2X4 STUDS @ 16” O.C. WITH 5/8
GYP, BD, EACH SIDE. TAPE & TEXTURE LEVEL 5 FINISH.
R-13 AT BATHROOM U.O.N.
PLUMBING WALL - 2X6 STUDS @ 16” O.C. WITH 5/8”
WP. GYP. BD. ON WET SIDE AND 5/8 GYP. BD. ON DRY
SIDE TAPE & TEXTURE LEVEL 5 FINISH. PROVIDE
CEMENT BACKER BD AT TILE INSTALLATIONS R-19
BATT INSULATION AT BATHROOM.
FLOOR PLAN NOTES:
THE FOLLOWING ARE PROVIDED IN EACH UNIT:
24” DEEP BASE CABINET WITH 36” HIGH
COUNTERTOP AND SPLASH.
36” HIGH ISLAND CABINET WITH COUNTERTOP.
13” DEEP OVERHEAD CABINET.
TWO COMPARTMENT SINK WITH GARBAGE DISPOSAL
- VERIFY DIMENSIONS IN MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS.
30” SLIDE- IN RANGE/OVEN WITH MICROWAVE LIGHT
AND EXHAUST FAN ABOVE (DUCT TO OUTSIDE AIR) -
VERIFY DIMENSIONS & REQUIRED CLEARANCES WITH
MANUFACTUERE'S SPECIFICATIONS PRIOR TO
FABRICATING CABINETS.
36” CLEAR REFRIGERATOR SPACE - PROVIDE
PLUMBING FOR ICEMAKER (RELEASED ON WALL).
24” DEEP COUNTERTOP AND SPLASH.
BUILT-IN PANTRY W/ SHELEVES.
32” X 60” ENAMELED STEEL TUB AND SHOWER WITH
APPROVED FINISH (3) WALLS TO 80” ABOVE FLOOR -
PROVIDE CLEAR TEMPERED GLASS ENCLOSURE AND
DOOR (DOOR SHALL HAVE INTEGRAL TOWER BAR) -
ALL SHOWER AND TUB/SHOWER COMBINATIONS ARE
REQUIRED TO HAVE A THERMOSTATIC MIXING VALVE
TYPE OR INDIVIDUAL CONTROL VALVES OF THE
PRESSURE BALANCE TYPE PER (UPC 410.7).
WASHER SPACE PROVIDE PLUMBING CONNECTIONS
(WASTE AND WATER) RECESSED WALL.
DRYER SPACE- PROVIDE SMOOTH METAL DRYER VENT
WITH BACKDRAFT DAMPER - VENT TO OUTSIDE AIR.
LENGTH OF CLOTHES DRYER VENT NOT TO EXCEED 14
FT. WITH MAXIMUM OF TWO 90 DEGREE TURNS.
TERMINATION TO BE 4”-0” - MINIMUM CLEAR FROM
PROPERTY LINE.
SHELF AND POLE.
SHELF AND DOUBLE POLE.
PROVIDE (1) LAYER OF 5/8” TYPE “X” GYP. BD. AT ALL
WALLS AND CEILING OF GARAGE.
PROVIDE MECHANICAL VENTILATION THIS ROOM
CAPABLE OF PROVIDING FIVE AIR CHANGES PER HOUR
- REFER TO ELCTRICAL DRAWINGS.
GAS WATER HEATER ON 18” HIGH PLYWOOD
PLATFORM - PROVIDE SEISMIC STRAPS AT POINTS
WITHIN THE UPPER AND LOWER ONE - THIRD OF ITS
VERTICAL DIMENSION. THE LOWER ANCHOR/STRAP
LOCATED TO MAINTAIN A DISTANCE OF 4 INCHES
ABOVE THE CONTROLS AND INSULATION PER TITLE
-24 ENERGY CALCS- PROVIDE PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE
WITH 1/2” COPPER DRAIN TO OUTSIDE. (PRIDE
WATER HEATER VENT THROUGH ROOF) & 12”X12”
LOUVER T&B.
FORCED AIR UNIT IN ATTIC- PROVIDE LIGHT, SWITCH,
110V RECEPTABLE AND FUEL GAS PER CMC SEC 319.
PROVIDE 22”X30” ATTIC ACCESS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
NOTES
498
2nd FLOOR
BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 15 W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 16
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 10W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 9
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN KITCHEN
ENTRY
ENTRY
UNIT 12 UNIT 13
ENTRY
UNIT 11
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
70 S.F.
3
A3
1
A3
4
A3
2
A3
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
139'-10 1/8"53'-6 1/2"14'-8 1/4"5'-11"14'-9"9'-1 3/4"14'-7 5/8"2'-8"12'-1 1/8"BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN
UNIT 14
ENTRY
CLOSET
ENTRY
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
H/W H/W
H/W H/W
15'-1 1/4"
40'-8 3/8"
10'-6"10'-6"
51'-2 3/8"
15'-1 1/4"
UP
UP
UP
UP REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:08 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA2SECOND FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW
499
3rd FLOOR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 23 W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 24
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"
ENTRY
UNIT 18W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
PORCH
LIVING RM
2 BEDRM.
830 SQ.FT.
BED RM 1
14'-0" X11'-9"
BED RM 2
10'-6" X11'-9"ENTRY
UNIT 17
W/DH/W
BATH
BATH
KITCHEN
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
CLOSET
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
KITCHEN
ENTRY
ENTRY
UNIT 20
UNIT 21
ENTRY
UNIT 19
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSETCLOSET
70 S.F.
3
A3
1
A3
4
A3
2
A3
139'-10 1/8"53'-6 1/2"14'-8 1/4"5'-11"14'-9"9'-1 3/4"14'-7 5/8"2'-8"12'-1 1/8"BREEZEWAY
490 SQ. FT.BATH
BED RM
10'-8" X10'-6"
LIVING RM
PANTRY
W/D
PORCH
UNIT 22
ENTRY
CLOSET
ENTRY
CLOSET
CLOSET CLOSET
H/W H/W
H/W H/W
15'-1 1/4"
40'-8 3/8"
10'-6"10'-6"
51'-2 3/8"
15'-1 1/4"
UP
UP
UP
UP
KITCHENKITCHEN
KITCHEN REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:08 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA3THIRD FLOOR PLAN 3/16"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW
500
10'-0"10'-0"REAR ELEVATION (EAST)
OPEN OPEN
OPENOPEN
10'-0"10'-0"FRONT ELEVATION (WEST)
OPENOPEN
OPEN OPEN10'-0"10'-0"LEFT ELEVATION (NORTH)10'-0"10'-0"RIGHT ELEVATION (SOUTH)
2
13
4 SCALE: 1 8"=1'SCALE: 1 8"=1'
SCALE: 1 8"=1'SCALE: 1 8"=1'7'-6"9'-8"18'-0"27'-0"27'-0"27'-0"27'-0"
6 COVERED PARKING CANOPY & TRASH ENCLOSURE SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
GRADE
126'-0"7'-6"9'-8"16'-0"
19'-0"
COVERED PARKING FRONT (REAR SIM)
COVERED PARKING END 1'-0"1'-0"1'-0"33'-0"33'-0"33'-0"33'-0"36'-6"36'-6"38'-6"38'-6"36'-6"36'-6"38'-6"1'2'-6"34'-0"38'-6"4'-6"1'2'-6"34'-0"2'-6"(E) NATURAL GRADE1'2'-6"1'4'-6"4'-6"34'-0"34'-0"(E) NATURAL GRADE
4'-6"16'-2"7'-0"8'-8"19'-1"
16'-2"
19'-1"7'-0"8'-8"TRASH ENCLOSURE FRONT TRASH ENCLOSURE REAR (SIDE SIM.)10'-8"1'-0"3'-0"7'-6"9'-8"13'-7"(E) NATURAL GRADE
(E) NATURAL GRADE
(E) NATURAL GRADE
OPEN OPEN
OPENOPEN 10'-0"10'-0"1'-0"10'-0"10'-0"REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\01_WINDHOVER SHT A1_A2-A3 FLRPLNS ELEVATIONS_10MAR2022.DWG 3/15/2022 10:13 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDRAWN BY:
of Sheet
Sheet
JOB:
SCALE:
DATE:(925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMA4ELEVATIONS 1/8"=1'-0"
11-16-2021
RWW11-19-2021PQR3-COAT STUCCO W. INTERGRAL COLOR O/ TYVEK & BLDG. PAPER
O/ ½” CDX PLYWOOD
2X4 PAINTED WOOD TRIM
2X10 PAINTED WOOD FASCIA W/ SHEET METAL GUTTER
2X WOOD BRACKETS
CLAY TILE CFAPS & PANS O/ 30LB. FELT O/PLYWOOD SUVSTARTE
ON FRAMING, SLOPE 6:12-SEE STRUCTURAL.
STUCCO WEEP SCREED
CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE (SEE STRUC.)
VINYL WINDOWS MFR'S WHITE W/ 1X4 PAINTED WOOD TRIM
VENT FLUE 24' ABOVE ANY POINT WIHTIN A 10”-0” RADIUS
SKYLIGHT ON 4” CURB.
STUCCO WRAPPED COLUMN
PATIO VINYL DOOR W/ CONCRETE LANDING
FINISH GRADE - SEE GRADING PLAN
42” HIGH WROUGHT IRON RAILING WITH CAP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
SHEET NOTES
501
502
503
FRONT ELEVATION (WEST)
21 3 WINDOWS: VINYL STYLE
ANDERSEN "SAND"
HARDIESHINGLE
"PEARL GRAY"
7/8" STUCCO -3 COAT :
BEHR "SANDSTONE"
OPENOPEN
OPEN OPEN
OPENOPEN REVISIONBYDESCRIPTIONDATEG:\SHARED DRIVES\WCLD\AUTOCAD AND REVIT\CAD WCLD\WINDHOVER\02_WINDHOVER CB1 _ COLOR BOARD_10MAR2022.DWG 3/11/2022 10:46 AMCUSTOM APARTMENTSDrawn By: PQR
of Sheet
Sheet
Job
SCALE
DATE 3-10-2022 (925) 246-2870CONCORD, CA 94520145 JOHN GLENN DRIVEWEST COAST LAND ANDDEVELOPMENT, INC.WWW.WCLANDS.COMNTS
CB1COLOR BOARD504
1
COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENT
between
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
and
WEST COAST LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC.
(County File No. CDDP21-03031)
This Community Benefits Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into as of
___________, 2024 (“Effective Date”) by and between Contra Costa County
(“County”), a political subdivision of the State of California, and West Coast Land
Development, Inc. (“Developer”), a Delaware corporation.
RECITALS
A. On , 2024, the County Board of Supervisors adopted a mitigated negative
declaration (the “MND”) and approved Developer’s Windhover Terrace Apartments Project
(the “Project”), a 24-unit apartment building development in the unincorporated Martinez area,
including a density bonus, development plan, and certain concessions, variances, and
reductions or waivers of development standards (CDDP21-03031).
B. In addition to the discretionary land use approvals already obtained from the
County, Developer intends to obtain County building permits necessary to construct the Project.
Following issuance of all required building permits and construction of the Project, and after the
construction has passed all required inspections by the County, Developer will receive a
certificate of occupancy from the County (“Occupancy Certificate”).
C. Due to its location, high density, and impacts on traffic in the immediate community,
the Project is a unique development with unique impacts on the community. The Project
approval contains Condition of Approval No. __, which provides that Contra Costa County and
Developer will enter into a Community Benefits Agreement providing for certain payments to
Contra Costa County to benefit the local community. The Developer’s commitments provided
for in this Agreement will enhance the public benefits provided to the community, in addition to
those benefits derived directly from the Project.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, Contra Costa County and Developer agree as follows:
1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to memorialize Developer’s commitment to
making a community benefits contribution to the County.
2. Community Benefits Payments. Developer shall make community benefits payments to
the County in accordance with this Section 2.
a. Developer shall pay $50,000 to the County (the “First Payment”) prior to the
issuance of any building or grading permit for the Project.
505
2
b. In addition to the First Payment, Developer shall pay $100,000 to the County (the
“Second Payment”) prior to the issuance of the Occupancy Certificate for the
Project.
c. Beginning on January 1, 2025, and on each January 1 thereafter, any unpaid
portion of the First Payment and any unpaid portion of the Second Payment shall
increase based on any increase in the Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco-
Oakland-Hayward Combined Statistical Area (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics) for
the 12-month period ending on the October 31 immediately preceding the January
1 when the increase takes effect.
3. Use of Payments. The County shall, in its sole discretion, allocate funds received pursuant
to this Agreement to benefit the local community near the Project. Funds may be used to,
for example and without limitation: fund studies and actions to improve the functionality of
roadways; establish or maintain parks or trails; maintain or beautify roadways, rights-of-
way, or open space; or establish, maintain, or beautify other community improvements.
4. Notices. All payments, notices, demands, and other communications made under this
Agreement shall be in writing and personally delivered, sent by overnight carrier with
delivery charges prepaid for next business day delivery, or sent by First Class U.S. Mail
with postage prepaid, and addressed as follows:
To County: Director of Conservation and Development
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
To Developer: West Coast Land Development, Inc.
c/o Pamela and Robert West
145 John Glenn Drive
Concord, CA 94520
A payment, notice, demand, or other communication shall be deemed given on the same day
it is personally delivered, on the next business day following deposit with and overnight
carrier, or on the fifth day after deposit in the U.S. Mail. A party may change its address for
delivery of notices under this Agreement by providing written notice of the change in
accordance with this section.
5. Assignment. Developer’s obligations under this Agreement shall be binding upon
Developer’s successors and assigns. Developer shall not assign this Agreement, or any of
its obligations under this Agreement, to any other person or entity without the advance
written approval of the County, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. If Developer
sells, conveys, or otherwise transfers ownership of the Project to a third-party, Developer
shall require that third-party to accept an assignment of this Agreement.
506
3
6. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement confers and rights or
obligations on any person or entity that is not a party to this Agreement.
7. Counterparts. The Agreement may be executed in counterparts.
8. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of
California.
The County and Developer have executed this agreement as specified below.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WEST COAST LAND
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
By: _______________________________ By: _______________________________
Name: _________________________ Name: _________________________
Title: __________________________ Title: __________________________
507
WINDHOVER TERRACE APARTMENTS PROJECT
COUNTY FILE #CDDP21-03031
County Board of
Supervisors
March 26, 2024
508
PARCEL OVERVIEW
509
PARCEL OVERVIEW
510
SITE PHOTOS
511
Project Description
Development Plan:
■Approximately 22,247-square-foot, 24-unit apartment building
■Covered carports
■Site improvements –pavement, utilities, stormwater conveyance, landscaping. etc
■Two units for low-income households
■One unit for very low -income households
Tree Permit for the removal of four (4) code-protected trees:
■London Plane, Carolina Cherry Laurel, California Black Walnut, Glossy Privet
Variance Requests:
■34.25’ height (where 30’ is the maximum)
■24.5’ driveway aisle width (where 25’ is the
minimum)
Other Requests:
■Density Bonus of 2 additional units
■Concession to reduce Open Space requirement
■Parking ratios per Government Code 65915(p)
■Reduced parking stall size, parking setbacks, and total number of covered parking spaces per Government Code 65915(e)
■Exception to Division 914, Collect and Convey 512
PROJECT DRAWINGS
513
Site Plan:
514
Floor Plan
Two -
bedroom
unit
4 units 830 sq
ft
One-
bedroom
unit
4 units 650 sq
ft
Red Box Inclusionary Housing Unit
Green Box One Bedroom Unit
Blue Box Two Bedroom Unit
Yellow Box InclusionaryHousing Unit (Floor 2)
Orange Box Inclusionary Housing Unit (Floor 3) 515
Elevations: Proposed
516
Environmental Review (MND)
The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for the project identified potential
environmental impacts in the areas of:
■Aesthetics
■Air Quality
■Cultural Resources
■Geology/Soils
■Noise
■Tribal Cultural Resources
The MND found that no significant environmental impacts will be created by the proposed 24-unit
apartment project with the enforcement of the stated mitigation measures.
517
Background ■A Development Plan application with a
Variance Permit and a Tree Permit was
initially submitted on October 12, 2021.
■The County Zoning Administrator
approved the Development Plan,
Variance Permit and Tree Permit with
modifications and added conditions of
approval on February 22, 2023.
■Staff received one letter from Joe Hise on
February 27, 2023, appealing the Zoning
Administrator’s decision.
■The County Planning Commission Denied
the project on August 9, 2023.
518
Project
Revisions To
Address
Concerns
From
Neighborhood
and CPC
The applicant has agreed on the following project revisions to address concerns from the County Planning Commission and Neighborhood
–Lower Building Height
–Increased parking on-site
–Adding communal/outdoor space
–Community Benefit Agreement
–Measures to reduce noise and light
–Retaining existing trees
519
Project Concerns
■The building pad height will be decreased
from 39.5 feet above mean sea level to
38.5 feet above mean sea level.
■Removal of parapet walls and lower third-
floor plate lines. Decrease total height
from 38.5’ to 34.25’.
■Six additional parking, total increased to
40 parking spaces.
■Project is adding two communal
gathering areas (benches, picnic
table/trellis, etc)
Building Pad Height
Building Height
Off-Street Parking
Communal Space
Project Revisions
520
Project Concerns
■Applicant has agreed to enter into a
Community Benefit Agreement for a
financial contribution.
■Increase CMU walls to seven feet and
more robust landscaping plan for sound
and visual barrier.
■Applicant will retain existing Olive Trees
Community Benefit
Noise and Light
Olive Trees
Project Revisions
521
Staff Conclusion
■The project is consistent with the applicable policies/standards of:
–County General Plan
–Zoning Consistency
■The environmental analysis found no significant impact on the environment with the
incorporation of specific mitigations.
■The project will provide additional needed housing and affordable housing units.
Staff recommends that the County Board of Supervisors:
OVERTURN the County Planning Commission’s denial of County File #CDDP21 -03031, and
GRANT the appeal of West Coast Land Development, Inc.
APPROVE County File #CDDP21 -03031 with the attached finding and conditions of approval
prepare for this project.
Staff Recommendation
522
QUESTIONS?
523
524
525
526
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP23-03020;
HARPREET HANSRA (APPLICANT & OWNER)
I. FINDINGS
A. Small Lot Design Review Findings
In approving a Development Plan in the R-10 Single-Family Residential District (R-10),
findings are required that the proposed project is consistent with the intent and
purpose of the R-10 district and is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, both
inside and outside the district. For applications that are Development Plans for a Small
Lot Design Review, the Development Plan compatibility findings are the Small Lot
Design Review findings for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, in terms
of its location, size, height, and design.
1. Small Lot Design Review Findings:
The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms
of its (a) location, (b) size, (c) height, and (d) design.
a. Location: The project involves a 1,400-square-foot second story addition and a
rear porch extension. The proposed project meets all-setback requirements and
the height requirements of the R-10 Single-Family Residential District. The
location of the addition is compatible as it is a vertical addition and fits within
the footprint of the existing house. The location of the rear porch extension is
compatible as it is extending an existing covered porch located in the rear and
will be fully located underneath the second story addition. The proposed
addition and rear porch extension do not exacerbate existing setback distances
and is located in an area that will not be heavily intrusive to surrounding
neighbors. The addition is designed to be step back from the front and side
first floor which allows for the mass to be broken up at the second level.
Additionally, the addition is not over the garage portion of the existing
residence which allows for views to continue to be maintained behind the
house. As a result, the project would be compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood in terms of setbacks and design.
b. Size: Home sizes in this single-family residential neighborhood and immediate
vicinity range between 2,500 square feet to over 5,000 square feet in size on
lots that range between 7,000 to 15,000 square feet. The residence will have a
total of 3,600 square feet of living space with the second story addition and an
additional 85 square feet for the extension of the covered porch. This is well
527
BOS – March 26, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 2 of 7
between the range of size for surrounding residences who also have rear
covered porches. The location of the addition will also be stepped back towards
the rear of the house which will decrease the overall size and bulk. The
extension of the rear porch will also be in the rear which will not increase the
overall size and bulk of that area. Therefore, the addition would be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
c. Height: The project meets the R-10 zoning height requirements. The project
meets the maximum story requirement by proposing two stories (where two
and one-half is the maximum) and the maximum height requirement by
proposing a total height of 23’-8 ½” (where 35 feet is the maximum).
Comparably, surrounding homes have heights starting from 15 feet to almost
33 feet tall. Staff has surveyed the surrounding streets including Freeman Road,
Stanley Court, Melody Drive, Hilton Road, Hilton Court, Juanita Drive,
Ponderosa Lane and Manzanita Court and identified numerous residences with
second stories that reside on neighboring streets. Moreover, there are a few
houses with design features that include a high roof pitch with large dormer
windows at a higher roof height which give the impression of it being a two-
story home.
d. Design: The applicant has designed the project to match the overall
characteristic of the neighborhood. The majority of the houses within this area
are either simple craftsman/craftsman-adjacent or ranch style homes that
incorporate various horizonal, vertical siding, shed and gable roofs with tapered
and straight porch posts, wide trims and groupings of one, two or three window
bays. Many homes in this area also incorporate composite shingle roofing while
utilizing an earth rich/neutral color palette for the walls. Staff has reviewed the
neighborhood and has identified that there is no one uniform or consistent
design theme in the neighborhood, but rather houses share a few common
design features with each other. The proposed project will match the roofing
material of neighboring houses by using composite shingle roofing, will match
the color scheme by using a white and blue paint with brown brick to match
the earth rich/neutral color palette of this neighborhood and will incorporate
the craftsman style such as utilizing horizontal lap sliding which is a common
siding material in this area and will match the window bay groupings of two
and three which is a common window grouping style in this area. The project
also matches the vertical siding at the gable ends of the roof which can be
found on several homes in the surrounding neighborhood on Hilton Drive,
Stanley Court, Melody Drive and Freeman Road. Lastly, the project is designed
to be minimally intrusive as it will also incorporate existing design features of
528
BOS – March 26, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 3 of 7
the single-story such as continuing the shake style siding on one portion of the
walls, will incorporate the same gable roof pitch and is installing a short eave
where the rear porch extension is to soften the bottom edge of the master suite
so the view of the rear appears to be less blocky, thereby making it one cohesive
design.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP23-03020
Project Approval
Development Plan for a Small Lot Design Review
1. This DEVELOPMENT PLAN for a SMALL LOT DESIGN REVIEW is APPROVED for the
construction of a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential
addition and an approximately 85-square-foot rear porch extension to the existing
single-family residence located at 3455 Freeman Road, Lafayette.
2. The Development Plan approval described above is granted as generally shown on:
• The application and project plans received by the Department of Conservation
and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on July 3, 2023:
• Supplemental application materials received on August 1, 2023.
3. Any change from the approved plans shall require review and approval by the CDD
and may require the filing of an application to modify this Development Plan.
4. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the work approved under this
Development Plan permit.
Payment of Fees
5. This Development Plan Permit application is subject to an initial application deposit
of $3,000.00, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials
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 2019/553, where a fee payment
is over 60 days past due, the Department of Conservation and Development may
seek a court judgement against the applicant and will charge interest at a rate of
529
BOS – March 26, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 4 of 7
ten percent (10%) from the date of judgement. The applicant may obtain current
costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly
after permit issuance.
Construction Period Restrictions and Requirements
All construction activity shall comply with the following restrictions, which shall be
included in the construction drawings.
6. The applicant and his contractor shall make a good faith effort to park any
construction related vehicles on the project driveway and existing asphalt parking
area at the front of the parcel.
7. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions
to adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all
project-related contractors.
8. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all
internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall
locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away
from existing residences as possible.
9. Transportation of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to weekdays
between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. and prohibited on Federal and
State holidays.
10. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of
construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site.
11. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number
and person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number shall
also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
12. 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:
530
BOS – March 26, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 5 of 7
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
531
BOS – March 26, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 6 of 7
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. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant is strongly encouraged to
contact the following agencies to determine if additional requirements and/or
additional permits are required as part of the proposed project:
• Contra Costa County Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division
• East Bay Municipal Utility District
• Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
Department of Conservation and Development
County Planning Commission
Wednesday, January 24, 2024 – 6:30 P.M.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____
Project Title: Appeal of Zoning Administrator Approval of Design Review for a 2-
story 1,400-square-foot residential addition
County File Number: CDDP23-03020
Appellants:
Applicant:
Jason and Iva Schwarz, et al.
Harpreet Hansra
Owner: Harpreet Hansra
Zoning/General Plan: R-10 Single-Family Residential District (R-10) / Single-Family
Residential-Medium Density (SM)
Site Address/Location: 3455 Freeman Road, Lafayette, CA 94595
APN: 185-211-014
California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Status:
The proposed project is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section
15301(e)(2), Existing Facilities – Addition to Existing Structure
Project Planner: Everett Louie, Planner II – Phone: (925) 655-2873
Email: everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us
Staff Recommendation: Approve (See section II for full recommendation)
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
This is a hearing on an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to approve a Small Lot
Design Review Development Plan for 3455 Freeman Road, Lafayette which includes the
construction of a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential addition and an
approximately 85 square-foot-extension to an existing rear porch of an existing single-
family residence.
557
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 2 of 9
II.RECOMMENDATION
A. OPEN the public hearing, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing.
B. DENY the appeal by Jason and Iva Schwarz, et al.
C. FIND that the proposed project is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(e)(2).
D. APPROVE the Small Lot Design Review Development Plan for the project, (CDDP23-
02030).
E. APPROVE the findings in support of the project.
F. APPROVE the project conditions of approval.
G. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to file a Notice of
Exemption with the County Clerk.
III.BACKGROUND
An application for the approval of a Small Lot Design Review application for the construction
of an approximately 1,400-square-foot, second story addition was first submitted under
County File CDSL23-00048 on May 31, 2023. A notice of opportunity to request a public
hearing was sent on June 8, 2023, with a deadline of 5:00 pm on Monday, June 19, 2023, for
any request for a public hearing. Three hearing requests were received during the required
10-day public hearing comment period for the Small Lot Design Review application. A
required development plan application, in response to the three public hearing requests,
was submitted on July 3, 2023 (County File #CDDP23-03020).
The Development Plan #CDDP23-03020, was initially heard by the County Zoning
Administrator on October 2, 2023, during which the County Zoning Administrator accepted
testimony from the applicant and members of the public. After receiving testimony and
considering the project analysis provided by County staff, the County Zoning Administrator
approved the Development Plan.
Staff received one letter appealing the Zoning Administrator’s October 2, 2023, decision
from Jason & Iva Schwarz on October 12, 2023, which included a list of neighbors who
signed the appeal letter. Staff’s analysis and response to the appeal letter is discussed in
Section VII (Appeal of Zoning Administrator’s October 2, 2023, decision) of this Staff report.
IV.SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION
558
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 3 of 9
Site Description: The subject property is located at 3455 Freeman Road, in the
unincorporated Lafayette area of Contra Costa County. The property is fronted by two public
roads, Freeman Road to the North which accesses the existing driveway, and Olympic
Boulevard to the south. The subject parcel is 8,118 square feet and contains an existing 2,200
square foot single-story residence. The site contains some vegetation and trees located in
the front yard and the rear yard. The property does not have much topography and is very
flat.
Surrounding Land Uses: The subject parcel is approximately 300 feet east of the City of
Lafayette jurisdiction border, is approximately 4500 feet southwest of the City of Walnut
Creek jurisdiction border and is approximately 5200 feet southwest of Interstate 680. The
parcel is located in an area of unincorporated Lafayette that is pre-dominantly single-family
residences. All adjacent parcels in a 300-foot radius are zoned R-10. Further north are R-10
zoned parcels and further south is a patch of R-20 zoned parcels. Parcels along Freeman
Road in the immediate vicinity typically range from 7,000 – 15,000 square feet in area.
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests approval of a Small Lot Design Review Development Plan to construct
a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential addition on to an existing
single-family residence and will add approximately 85 square feet to extend an existing rear
porch. The porch extension is due to the second story addition being placed directly above
the porch and an existing walkway, enclosing it from the top. The second story addition will
consist of the following:
•Four Bedrooms
•One Loft
•Two Bathrooms
•One Utility Closet
•One Laundry Room
The overall addition will bring the residence from its original 2,200 square feet of residential
space to 3,600 square feet with an additional 85 square feet of covered rear porch. Other
work that is not included in the Small Lot Design Review Development Plan application is an
interior remodel to the exiting kitchen and a sliding glass door.
VI.APPEAL OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S OCTOBER 2, 2023, DECISION
During the appeal period following approval by the Zoning Administrator, one appeal was
received from Jason and Iva Schwarz. In the correspondence received on October 12, 2023,
Jason and Iva Schwarz filed an appeal on behalf of the signed neighbors included on the
559
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 4 of 9
letter, appealing the Zoning Administrator’s decision. The concerns raised in the letter of
appeal, and staff’s responses, are summarized as follows:
1.Summary of Appeal Point #1: The appellant stated that the noticing for the public
hearing was deficient because many neighbors did not receive the public hearing
notice or received the notice too late.
Staff Response: County Code Section 26-2.2004- Notice Requirements states that
the “Planning Department shall schedule a hearing before the appropriate division
and mail notice thereof pursuant to Government Code Section 65905.” California
Code, Government Code §65091 states “that Notice of the hearing shall be mailed
or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to all owners of real property as
shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within 300 feet of the real property
that is the subject of the hearing.” For all projects that require a public hearing
notification, County Staff prepares and reviews a 300-foot notification list which
encompasses all addresses and property owners within the required noticing area.
Staff reviewed the 300-foot notification list and identified all residents within the
300-foot noticing area who claim did not receive the notice in the appeal letter.
Additionally, when the County mails out the public hearing notices, a signed affidavit
is filled out as proof that the notice was mailed to the property owners identified in
the 300-foot notification list which includes names and addresses of each neighbor
and an actual map of the 300-foot list. Staff has a signed affidavit dated September
19, 2023, which declares that the public hearing notice was mailed to all addresses
on the 300-foot list, 12 calendar days before the scheduled public hearing on
October 2, 2023. A scanned copy of the signed affidavit is included as attachment #3
–Public Notice Affidavit. Therefore, County Staff followed the correct notification
process as dictated by Government Code §65091 and County Code Section 26-
2.2004.
2.Summary of Appeal Point #2: The appellant expresses concern that the guidelines
for a small lot review were not followed as the project was not compared to other
substandard lots within the neighborhood for compatibility and that the project size
is incompatible.
Staff Response: County Code Section 82-10.002(c) – Small Lot Occupancy states that
a building permit can be issued for a small lot if the Zoning Administrator determines
that the proposed project us compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in
terms of its location, size, height and design. The County Code specifically states that
compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood must be made and does not
require the County to only compare the project to other substandard lots. Rather,
the intent of the code is to allow the Zoning Administrator to determine the
560
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 5 of 9
compatibility of the project to the surrounding neighborhood which includes lots of
various sizes and shapes. Moreover, the code does not distinguish what qualifies as
the surrounding neighborhood as the County is not uniform and every
neighborhood in the County is different. For the analysis of this project, Staff relied
on the boundaries of the Community that the project is located in. The subject parcel
is in the Saranap neighborhood. The Saranap area includes parcels and houses on
streets that are on the subject street (Freeman Road), or streets that are directly
accessed from Freeman Road including Melody Drive, Stanley Court, Freeman Court,
Hilton Court, Hilton Road, Juanita Drive and Ponderosa Lane. All houses surveyed for
compatibility are approximately within 1,000 feet from the subject parcel and Staff
identified multiple two-story houses within this radius. The County cannot exclude
parcels that are smaller or larger than the subject parcel from their review because
the lot size is not exactly the same.
The appellant states that the proposed square footage of the project would be
double that of the surrounding neighborhood. The project size has been determined
to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood because this area of the
County contains houses with a wide range of sizes. Moreover, development patterns
in the Saranap area are showing that houses are growing as more homeowners
improve the livability of their property. Therefore, when surveying nearby homes, the
project which will have 3,600 is consistent with total square footage as shown in the
below table.
Address Square Footage
3454 Freeman Road
185-250-020
2,907 SF
3522 Freeman Road
185-250-030
4,433 SF
3514 Freeman Road
185-250-024
3,087 SF
24 Stanley Court
185-250-017
3,105 SF
3362 Freeman Road
185-220-016
3,668 SF
3351 Freeman Road
185-220-001
3,285 SF
3300 Freeman Road
185-220-008
3,608 SF
3506 Freeman Road
185-250-023
3,234 SF
561
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 6 of 9
1015 El Curtola Blvd
185-270-025
4,336 SF
3565 Melody Drive
185-250-035
3,154 SF
3541 Melody Drive
185-250-037
3,398 SF
3547 Melody Drive
185-250-038
3,213 SF
*Square footage is from Assessor’s Information and Zillow
As shown in the table above, the proposed residence is well within the range of
square footage for houses within the Saranap neighborhood. Therefore, because the
Small Lot Design Review Findings can be made (See attachment 1 – Findings and
Conditions of Approval) which determine that the project is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood with respect to the location, size, height and design.
3.Summary of Appeal Point #3: The appellant stated that County Staff relied exclusively
on homes outside of the immediate neighborhood when reviewing the project for
small lot design review compatibility and there are no two-story homes within 1,000
feet.
Staff Response: As stated in Staff’s Response to appeal point #2, the County
Ordinance does not specify a minimum or maximum distance when determining the
boundaries of a neighborhood for references of compatibility. For the analysis of this
project, Staff relied on the boundaries of the established Community that the project
is located in. The subject parcel is within the Saranap neighborhood. Examining
surrounding main roads and routes into the subject neighborhood, the significant
entrances into the area include Bridgefield road on the south and Kinney Drive on
the north. Freeman Road is bound to the south by Olympic Boulevard which acts as
a natural barrier for the extent of the “neighborhood.” As delineated on County map
(see attachment 4 – Saranap Compatibility Map), the Saranap neighborhood
encompasses all of Freeman Road, Hilton Court and Road, Melody Drive, Stanley
Court, Juanita Drive, Ponderosa Lane and many more streets. The appellant is stating
that homes on Melody Drive should not have been used for compatibility when these
homes are located less than 500 feet away are directly accessed from Freeman Road.
When reviewing homes on these streets, Staff found numerous two-story homes or
homes with two-story elements within 1,000 feet. The below table represents the
location of a two-story home and the distance in a straight line from the subject
parcel.
562
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 7 of 9
Address of two-story house or house
with two-story elements
Location from Project
25 Hilton Court
185-250-029
Approx. 617 Feet North of Project
741 Hilton Road
185-260-004
Approx. 871 Feet North of Project
3514 Freeman Road
185-250-024
Approx. 468 Feet North of Project
3522 Freeman Road
185-250-030
Approx. 621 Feet North of Project
3448 Freeman Road
185-250-014
Approx. 57 Feet North of Project
835 Juanita Drive
185-270-005
Approx. 957 Feet North of Project
860 Juanita Drive
185-250-033
Approx. 715 Feet North of Project
865 Juanita Drive
185-250-033
Approx. 965 Feet North of Project
3565 Melody Drive
185-250-035
Approx. 750 Feet East of Project
3541 Melody Drive
185-250-039
Approx. 570 Feet East of Project
3559 Melody Drive
185-250-036
Approx. 750 Feet East of Project
3547 Melody Drive
185-250-038
Approx. 530 Feet East of Project
3553 Melody Drive
185-250-037
Approx. 615 Feet East of Project
144 Ponderosa Lane
185-241-019
Approx. 766 Feet North of Project
As stated before, the size of a parcel does not disqualify that parcel from being
included in a compatibility analysis. County Code 82-10.002(c) requires the Zoning
Administrator to determine that the proposed project is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood. In this case, the neighborhood is the Saranap Area which
allows Staff to survey all parcels within the boundaries. Therefore, Staff has reviewed
all parcels within a reasonable radius of the subject parcel and has determined from
the table above that there are multiple two-story homes within 1,000 feet of the
subject parcel.
563
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 8 of 9
4.Summary of Appeal Point #4: The appellant stated that two story homes in this
neighborhood are only on larger parcel lots and that a two-story home on a
substandard lot would negatively impact the neighborhood in regard to privacy.
Staff Response: In determining compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood,
County Staff relies on the R-10 Zoning Ordinance and the development patterns of
the neighborhood. The size of a parcel does not disallow a two-story development.
The project conforms to the development standards of the R-10 District. The project
does not exceed the two and one-half stories or thirty-five feet in height
requirement. The project meets and exceeds all setback requirements for the front,
secondary frontage and side. Additionally, the project is designed to be less
obtrusive by stepping back the addition and locating it towards the rear of the
residence, with a height that is within the maximum allowance. Moreover, the
applicant has designed the project to match the overall characteristic of the
neighborhood including matching the styles and architecture patterns of
surrounding houses and incorporating them into the project. The project which is
residential in nature is consistent with the development pattern of this area in that
smaller lots will build up instead of outwards as the small lot size restricts
development due to the setback requirements. Moreover, because the project meets
the required setbacks, there is the required space between parcels that is required
to maintain privacy. The project has been designed to avoid any such privacy
impacts. The bedroom windows for the second story have been designed to be
facing away private places in neighboring residences. The windows that on the side
of the addition that face the east and west toward the neighboring residences
overlook the roofs of the neighboring residences and do not have a view into the
rear yard. The rear bedroom on the second floor is designed to be located in the
center of the lot to protect privacy with a minimum number of side windows that are
setback 22 feet from the closest residence to the east and setback 25 feet from the
closest residence from the west. This setback distance enhances privacy for the
neighbors. Furthermore, the Small Lot Design Review findings related to the location,
size, height and design of the project are supported (see attachment 1 – Findings
and Conditions of Approval). Therefore, the project would not have a significant
negative impact on the character of the neighborhood because the project meets
and exceeds all requirements of the R-10 zoning code and is compatible with other
surrounding developments that have two-story elements.
5. Summary of Appeal Point #5: The appellant expressed concerns that the property
owner made no effort to contact the neighbors to discuss the project.
Staff Response: The County Ordinance does not require an applicant to engage with
surrounding neighbors in regard to their project. Furthermore, public hearings
564
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
County File #CDDP23-03020
Page 9 of 9
provide a forum for neighbors to bring their questions and concerns for discussion.
VII.CONCLUSION
The proposed project is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan,
and also with the intent of the SM General Plan Designation and the R-10 Zoning District.
The project is consistent with the established area as single-family residences with two-story
elements are a common occurrence. The Small Lot Design Review findings are made which
determines that the proposed second story addition is compatible with the Saranap
community. Therefore, Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission deny the
appeal and approve County File #CDDP23-03020, based on the attached findings and
subject to the attached conditions of approval.
Attachments:
1.Findings and Conditions of Approval
2.Appeal Letter On Zoning Administrator’s Decision
3.Public Noticing Affidavit
4.Saranap Compatibility Map
5.Zoning Administrator Staff Report and Attachments
6.Power Point Slides
565
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP23-03020;
HARPREET HANSRA (APPLICANT & OWNER)
I. FINDINGS
A. Small Lot Design Review Findings
In approving a Development Plan in the R-10 Single-Family Residential District (R-10),
findings are required that the proposed project is consistent with the intent and
purpose of the R-10 district and is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, both
inside and outside the district. For applications that are Development Plans for a Small
Lot Design Review, the Development Plan compatibility findings are the Small Lot
Design Review findings for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, in terms
of its location, size, height, and design.
1. Small Lot Design Review Findings:
The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms
of its (a) location, (b) size, (c) height, and (d) design.
a. Location: The project involves a 1,400-square-foot second story addition and a
rear porch extension. The proposed project meets all-setback requirements and
the height requirements of the R-10 Single-Family Residential District. The
location of the addition is compatible as it is a vertical addition and fits within
the footprint of the existing house. The location of the rear porch extension is
compatible as it is extending an existing covered porch located in the rear and
will be fully located underneath the second story addition. The proposed
addition and rear porch extension do not exacerbate existing setback distances
and is located in an area that will not be heavily intrusive to surrounding
neighbors. The addition is designed to be step back from the front and side
first floor which allows for the mass to be broken up at the second level.
Additionally, the addition is not over the garage portion of the existing
residence which allows for views to continue to be maintained behind the
house. As a result, the project would be compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood in terms of setbacks and design.
b. Size: Home sizes in this single-family residential neighborhood and immediate
vicinity range between 2,500 square feet to over 5,000 square feet in size on
lots that range between 7,000 to 15,000 square feet. The residence will have a
total of 3,600 square feet of living space with the second story addition and an
additional 85 square feet for the extension of the covered porch. This is well
566
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 2 of 6
between the range of size for surrounding residences who also have rear
covered porches. The location of the addition will also be stepped back towards
the rear of the house which will decrease the overall size and bulk. The
extension of the rear porch will also be in the rear which will not increase the
overall size and bulk of that area. Therefore, the addition would be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
c. Height: The project meets the R-10 zoning height requirements. The project
meets the maximum story requirement by proposing two stories (where two
and one-half is the maximum) and the maximum height requirement by
proposing a total height of 23’-8 ½” (where 35 feet is the maximum).
Comparably, surrounding homes have heights starting from 15 feet to almost
33 feet tall. Staff has surveyed the surrounding streets including Freeman Road,
Stanley Court, Melody Drive, Hilton Road, Hilton Court, Juanita Drive,
Ponderosa Lane and Manzanita Court and identified numerous residences with
second stories that reside on neighboring streets. Moreover, there are a few
houses with design features that include a high roof pitch with large dormer
windows at a higher roof height which give the impression of it being a two-
story home.
d. Design: The applicant has designed the project to match the overall
characteristic of the neighborhood. The majority of the houses within this area
are either simple craftsman/craftsman-adjacent or ranch style homes that
incorporate various horizonal, vertical siding, shed and gable roofs with tapered
and straight porch posts, wide trims and groupings of one, two or three window
bays. Many homes in this area also incorporate composite shingle roofing while
utilizing an earth rich/neutral color palette for the walls. Staff has reviewed the
neighborhood and has identified that there is no one uniform or consistent
design theme in the neighborhood, but rather houses share a few common
design features with each other. The proposed project will match the roofing
material of neighboring houses by using composite shingle roofing, will match
the color scheme by using a white and blue paint with brown brick to match
the earth rich/neutral color palette of this neighborhood and will incorporate
the craftsman style such as utilizing horizontal lap sliding which is a common
siding material in this area and will match the window bay groupings of two
and three which is a common window grouping style in this area. The project
also matches the vertical siding at the gable ends of the roof which can be
found on several homes in the surrounding neighborhood on Hilton Drive,
Stanley Court, Melody Drive and Freeman Road. Lastly, the project is designed
to be minimally intrusive as it will also incorporate existing design features of
567
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 3 of 6
the single-story such as continuing the shake style siding on one portion of the
walls, will incorporate the same gable roof pitch and is installing a short eave
where the rear porch extension is to soften the bottom edge of the master suite
so the view of the rear appears to be less blocky, thereby making it one cohesive
design.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP23-03020
Project Approval
Development Plan for a Small Lot Design Review
1. This DEVELOPMENT PLAN for a SMALL LOT DESIGN REVIEW is APPROVED for the
construction of a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential
addition and an approximately 85-square-foot rear porch extension to the existing
single-family residence located at 3455 Freeman Road, Lafayette.
2. The Development Plan approval described above is granted as generally shown on:
• The application and project plans received by the Department of Conservation
and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on July 3, 2023:
• Supplemental application materials received on August 1, 2023.
3. Any change from the approved plans shall require review and approval by the CDD
and may require the filing of an application to modify this Development Plan.
4. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the work approved under this
Development Plan permit.
Payment of Fees
5. This Development Plan Permit application is subject to an initial application deposit
of $3,000.00, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials
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 2019/553, where a fee payment
is over 60 days past due, the Department of Conservation and Development may
seek a court judgement against the applicant and will charge interest at a rate of
568
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 4 of 6
ten percent (10%) from the date of judgement. The applicant may obtain current
costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly
after permit issuance.
Construction Period Restrictions and Requirements
All construction activity shall comply with the following restrictions, which shall be
included in the construction drawings.
6. The applicant and his contractor shall make a good faith effort to park any
construction related vehicles on the project driveway and existing asphalt parking
area at the front of the parcel.
7. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions
to adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all
project-related contractors.
8. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all
internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall
locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away
from existing residences as possible.
9. Transportation of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to weekdays
between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. and prohibited on Federal and
State holidays.
10. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of
construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site.
11. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number
and person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number shall
also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
12. 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:
569
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 5 of 6
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
570
County Planning Commission – January 24, 2024
CDDP23-03020
Page 6 of 6
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. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant is strongly encouraged to
contact the following agencies to determine if additional requirements and/or
additional permits are required as part of the proposed project:
• Contra Costa County Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division
• East Bay Municipal Utility District
• Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
2727 SF
2914 SF
3087 SF
3234 SF
3608 SF
2649 SF
2036 SF
4354 SF
2733 SF
3015 SF
2347 SF
1794 SF
2746 SF
2697 SF
3227 SF
2884 SF
2282 SF2850 SF2674 SF
2079 SF
2358 SF
3427 SF
3668 SF
1453 SF
2693 SF 2224 SF
1680 SF
2056 SF
1651 SF
3573 SF1506 SF
2120 SF
3398 SF
2645 SF
1516 SF
2504 SF3325 SF1516 SF
3285 SF
3087 SF 2210 SF
1742 SF
2362 SF
1936 SF
2925 SF
2049 SF
2313 SF
1673 SF
2776 SF
2055 SF
1084 SF
2346 SF
1457 SF
2507 SF
2994 SF
2055 SF
1530 SF
1414 SF
2044 SF
2907 SF
2531 SF
2446 SF
1876 SF
1543 SF
2574 SF
1856 SF
1456 SF
2610 SF
4433 SF
2037 SF
1586 SF
1404 SF
1450 SF
3213 SF
1664 SF
2148 SF
2040 SF
1685 SF
1118 SF
1158 SF
2187 SF
1950 SF
2064 SF
1961 SF
1472 SF
1233 SF
1753 SF
3213 SF
1927 SF2856 SF
1921 SF
2210 SF
1641 SF
1713 SF
2082 SF
2688 SF
1889 SF 2827 SF
2882 SF
1652 SF
2657 SF1313 SF 2337 SF1664 SF 1619 SF
1967 SF
2984 SF 1855 SF2200 SF
1925 SF1530 SF
2209 SF
1524 SF
954 SF
1314 SF
1881 SF
2228 SF
1272 SF
1364 SF
1689 SF
1271 SF
1971 SF
1204 SF
1225 SF
2044 SF2106 SF
2034 SF
1815 SF
1514 SF
2082 SF
1855 SF
1447 SF
1529 SF
1780 SF
2843 SF
1225 SF
2028 SF
1225 SF
2341 SF
1657 SF
2039 SF
1333 SF
1345 SF
1263 SF
1718 SF1830 SF
1648 SF
927 SF
1314 SF 1330 SF
927 SF
2423 SF1921 SF1610 SF
1858 SF
1615 SF
2223 SF
2844 SF
Lafayette
Olympic Blvd
Olympic Blvd
F r e e m a n R d
Juanita Dr
Olympic Blvd
Boulevard
W
ay
W Newell Ave
WindtreeCt KinneyDrKing DrHilton Rd
Newel
l
Ct
Pon d e rosaLnSanfordLnFreeman Ct
Hilton Ct
El
C
u
rt
o
l
a
Bl
vdMelody DrC
arrol Pl
Acac iaRdStanley CtB
oulevard Ct
Evergreen CtM
a
n
za
nita Ct
ElDoradoRdMap Created 10/31/2023
by Contra Costa County Department of
Conservation and Development, GIS Group
30 Muir Road, M artinez, CA 94553
37:59:41.791N 122:07:03.756WI019038095
Feet This map was created by the Contra C osta County Departm ent of Conservation and
Development with data from the Contra Costa County GIS Program. Som e
base data, primarily City Lim its, is derived from the CA State Board of Equalization's
tax rate areas. While obligated to use this data the County assum es no responsibility for
its accuracy. This map contains copyrighted information and may not be altered. It m ay 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.(Aerial P hoto taken 2019)
Project Site
Two story homes
Project Study Area
Single story homes with two story elements
Parcels
Lafayette City Limits
CDDP23-03020: Map of compatible homes within the Sar anap Ar ea
582
Department of Conservation and Development
County Zoning Administrator
Monday, October 2, 2023 – 1:30 P.M.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item #_____
Project Title:
Small Lot Design Review Development Plan for a 2-story
1,400-square-foot residential addition and rear porch
extension
County File(s):
#CDDP23-03020
Applicant:
Harpreet Hansra
Owner:
Harpreet Hansra
Zoning/General Plan:
R-10 Single-Family Residential District (R-10) / Single-Family
Residential-Medium Density (SM)
Site Address/Location: 3455 Freeman Road, Lafayette, CA 94595
APN: 185-211-014
California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Status:
The proposed project is exempt under CEQA Guidelines
Section 15301(e)(2), Existing Facilities – Addition to Existing
Structure
Project Planner: Everett Louie, Planner II
(925) 655-2873
Everett.Louie@dcd.cccounty.us
Staff Recommendation: Approve (See section II for full recommendation)
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
The applicant requests approval of a Small Lot Design Review Development Plan to
construct a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential addition and
an approximately 85-square-foot extension to an existing rear porch of an existing
single-family residence.
583
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 2 of 9
II. RECOMMENDATION
A. Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator APPROVE County File #CDDP23-
03020, based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions of
approval.
B. DIRECT staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.
III. BACKGROUND
The small lot design review request is for the construction of an approximately 1,400-
square-foot addition, two-story second story addition. The project was first
submitted as County File CDSL23-00048 on May 31, 2023. A notice of opportunity
to request a public hearing was sent on June 8, 2023, with a deadline of 5:00 pm on
Monday, June 19, 2023, for any request for a public hearing. Three hearing requests
were received during the required 10-day public comment period for the Small Lot
Design Review. A required development plan application, in response to the three
public hearing requests, was submitted on July 3, 2023 (County File #CDDP23-
03020).
IV. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. General Plan: The subject property is located within a Single-Family Residential -
Medium Density (SM) General Plan Land Use Designation.
B. Zoning: The subject property is located within a R-10 Single-Family Residential
District (R-10).
C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance: The proposed project
is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. This CEQA section exempts
existing facilities, and additions to existing structures of no more than 10,000
square feet in an area that is not environmentally sensitive and where all public
services and facilities are available for the maximum development permissible in
the General Plan. The proposed project is a 1,400-square-foot addition and an
85-square-foot extension to an existing rear porch of an existing single-family
residence. The total square footage added to the proposed project does not
exceed 10,000 square feet and the project is not in an area that is environmentally
sensitive. The site is currently served by water, sanitary and fire and will continue
to be served by public services as the parcel is located within the Urban Limit
Line. Therefore, the project is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(e)(2).
584
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 3 of 9
D. Lot Creation: The parcel is Lot 7 Block B of the Bridgefield Tract recorded in 1946.
The subdivision at that time created the lot.
E. Previous Applications:
a. CDVR23-01014: A variance and small lot design review application to
construct an approximately 1,400-square-foot second story addition with a
10’ aggregate side yard (where 15’ is the minimum). This application was
withdrawn as the residential lot was legally created before 1947 which allows
for a sliding scale for side yards, and thus, a variance was not required.
b. CDSL23-00048: A small lot design review application to construct an
approximately 1,400-square-foot second story addition. Three hearing
requests were received, and in response, the current development plan
application was submitted.
V. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION
The subject property is located at 3455 Freeman Road, in the unincorporated
Lafayette area of Contra Costa County. The property is fronted by two public roads,
Freeman Road to the North which accesses the existing driveway, and Olympic
Boulevard to the south. The subject parcel is 8,118 square feet and contains an
existing 2,200 square foot single-story residence. The site contains some vegetation
and trees located in the front yard and the rear yard. The property does not have
much topography and is very flat.
The subject parcel is approximately 300 feet east of the City of Lafayette jurisdiction
border, is approximately 4500 feet southwest of the City of Walnut Creek jurisdiction
border and is approximately 5200 feet southwest of Interstate 680. The parcel is
located in an area of unincorporated Lafayette that is pre-dominantly single-family
residences. All adjacent parcels in a 300-foot radius are zoned R-10. Further north
are R-10 zoned parcels and further south is a patch of R-20 zoned parcels. Parcels
along Freeman Road in the immediate vicinity typically range from 7,000 – 15,000
square feet in area.
VI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests approval of a Small Lot Design Review Development Plan to
construct a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential addition on to
585
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 4 of 9
an existing single-family residence and will add approximately 85 square feet to
extend an existing rear porch. The porch extension is due to the second story
addition being placed directly above the porch, enclosing it from the top. The second
story addition will consist of the following:
• Four Bedrooms
• One Loft
• Two bathrooms
• One Utility closet
• One Laundry Room
The overall addition will bring the residence from its original 2,200 square feet of
residential space to 3,600 square feet with an additional 85 square feet of covered
rear porch. Other work that is not included in the Small Lot Design Review
Development Plan application is an interior remodel to the exiting kitchen and a
sliding glass door.
VII. AGENCY COMMENTS
A. San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District: In a returned comment form dated
November 21, 2022, Fire District staff indicated the project is to comply with
current Fire code requirements at the time of submittals. No other comments
were provided.
B. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District: In an email response received on July 14,
2023, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District staff indicated that the project would
not be expected to produce an unmanageable added capacity demand on the
wastewater system, nor interfere with existing public facilities.
C. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD): In a letter dated March 27, 2023, East
Bay Municipal Utility District Staff indicated that the project applicant shall
contact EBMUD’s new business office and request a water service estimate.
D. Application and Permit Center, Public Works Staff: In a returned agency comment
packet dated July 24, 2023, Staff indicated that a flood plain permit is not
required.
E. Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District: In a returned agency
comment packet dated July 18, 2023, Staff indicated that they had no comments
on the project.
586
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 5 of 9
No comments were received from the following agencies: Contra Costa County
Environmental Health Department, City of Lafayette, and the Contra Costa County,
Building Inspection Division.
VIII. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING
During the 10-day notice period for County File # CDSL23-03020, staff received three
letters requesting a public hearing. The following contains the summarization of
comments received and staff’s responses.
A. Gayle Schiller: On June 14, 2023, staff received a request for public hearing from
the neighbors residing in 20 Stanley Court, Lafayette, CA 94595.
Comment: Gayle Schiller has concerns with trucks parking, turning around or
using Stanley Court which could create congestion on Stanley Court.
Staff Response: Stanley Court is located directly across the street from the project
site. Freeman Road is a County maintained road; however, Stanley Court is not a
County maintained road and therefore, the County can not impose parking
restrictions on a private court. Moreover, the project site has an existing asphalt
driveway and asphalt parking area in the front yard where construction vehicles
can utilize existing off-street parking on-site. The site has a large enough
driveway to allow construction vehicles to turn around on the existing driveway.
Staff has included conditions of approval (COA #6-12) that limit the hours of
construction to the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday and
prohibiting work on State and Federal holidays and limit the use of trucks to
weekdays between the hours of 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM and prohibiting work on
Federal and State holidays and requiring a good faith effort to park vehicles on
the project site. These conditions of approval will help address any construction
related issues in regard to having too many vehicles on the site as the use of
construction vehicles will be limited to specific hours of the day.
B. Nicole Jones & Geoff Foster: On June 14, 2023, staff received a second letter
from a neighbor residing at 3454 Freeman Road, Lafayette, CA 94595.
Comment: Freeman Road is almost 100% single story homes, and a second story
addition is not compatible with design, size and height of our neighborhood.
Staff Response: The property is zoned R-10, which allows a maximum height of
587
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 6 of 9
two and one-half stories or thirty-five feet in height. The proposed project is a
second story addition that does not exceed thirty-five feet. The project meets the
R-10 zoning district height requirement. Additionally, Staff has surveyed the
neighboring properties located on the following roads: Freeman Road, Stanley
Court, Meledy Court, Hilton Road, Hilton Court, Juanita Drive, Ponderosa Lane
and Manzanita Court. These roads contain properties with single-family
residences that have two stories. Moreover, there are a few single-story houses
along Freeman Road (3448 Freeman Road for example) that incorporate a very
high roof pitch with large dormer windows on the roof which give the appearance
of a second story. Moreover, the design of the proposed addition utilizes a step
back design as the second story addition is placed farther back from the front
and is not on top of the garage. This design feature breaks up the massing and
bulk of the project and also allows the residents of 3454 Freeman Road to still
see over the proposed project as the addition is located on the southeast corner
of the residence and will allow for a sight line over the western portion of the
house (garage). The extension of the rear porch will be located behind the house
which is a consistent location feature for houses along Freeman Road.
As stated in the Small Lot Design Review Findings of this Staff report, the project
is compatible with the location, size, height and design. The location of the
addition is compatible as it is a vertical addition and fits within the footprint of
the existing house. The project will not change the existing setbacks as the project
will be building up. The bulk of the addition will be in the middle of the residence
with part of the addition towards the east. The porch extension at the rear of the
house is located in a location that is consistent with surrounding properties.
Numerous properties along Freeman Road have porches behind the house. The
size of the residence with the proposed addition will be 3,600 square feet while
the porch extension will add 85 square feet. Staff has surveyed the surrounding
area, and there are houses ranging in size from 2,500 to 5,000 square feet.
Therefore, the proposed project is compatible in respect to size. As mentioned
above, the project meets the R-10 zoning height requirements and is consistent
with other two-story residences in this area of the County. The total height of the
project will be approximately 23’-8 ½”. Comparably, surrounding homes have
heights from 15 feet to almost 33 feet tall. The proposed project is well within
the range of heights for this area of the County. The applicant has designed the
project to match the overall characteristic of the neighborhood. Many of the
houses within this area are either simple craftsman/craftsman-adjacent or ranch
style homes that incorporate various horizonal, vertical siding, shed and gable
roofs with tapered and straight porch posts, wide trims and groupings of one,
two or three window bays. Many homes in this area also incorporate composite
588
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 7 of 9
shingle roofing while utilizing a neutral color palette for the walls. The proposed
project will match the roofing material of neighboring houses by using composite
shingle roofing, will match the color scheme by using a white and blue paint with
brown brick which is a style in this area and will incorporate the craftsman style
such as utilizing horizontal lap sliding which is a common siding material in this
area and will match the window bay groupings of two and three which is a
common window grouping style in this area. To make the porch extension more
cohesive, the applicant will place a small narrow extension of a short eave on the
bottom plane of the master suite that extends past the footprint of the house to
soften the bottom edge of the master suite so it’s not blocky. Lastly, the project
is designed to be minimally intrusive as it will also incorporate existing design
features of the single-story such as continuing the shake style siding on one
portion of the walls and will incorporate the same gable roof pitch, thereby
making it one cohesive design.
C. Jason Schwarz: On June 14, 2023, staff received a third letter from a neighbor
residing at 3471 Freeman Road, Lafayette, CA 94595
Comment: Jason Schwarz submitted a letter requesting a public hearing.
Staff Response: In the request for a public hearing, Jason Schwarz did not specify
any specific concerns or issues with the proposed project.
IX. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. Consistency with General Plan: The residence at 3455 Freeman Road is located
within a Single-Family Residential – Medium Density (SM) General Plan Land Use
designation. The SM designation is intended to promote the orderly
development of residential neighborhoods at the density level of 3.0-4.9 units
per net acre. The homes along Freeman Road, have been developed so that the
residential development is consistent with the SM designation. Primary land uses
permitted in this designation include single-family homes and accessory
buildings and structures. The proposed project is to add a second story addition
and extend and existing porch of an existing single-family residence. This is a
consistent use with the General Plan Land Use designation. The proposed
addition would not change the use of the site or the residential density, and
therefore, would be consistent with the SM designation. Further, the single-family
residence with the proposed addition would remain consistent with the
residential character of the neighborhood, and thereby would not disrupt the
orderly development of this neighborhood.
589
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 8 of 9
B. Consistency with Zoning: The subject property is located within a R-10 Single-
Family Residential District (R-10). The intent of the R-10 Zoning District is to
provide orderly development of single-family residential uses, accessory
structures and uses normally auxiliary to them. The proposed project involves a
1,400-square-foot, second story addition and an approximately 85-square-foot
extension to the existing rear porch. The proposed addition and rear porch
extension would conform to the development standards of the R-10 District as
shown below due to the addition being placed directly on top of the existing
single-family residence. The proposed project does not exacerbate the existing
setback dimensions of the single-family residence as indicated in the table below.
Project Development Standards Of The R-10 Single-Family Residential District
Development Standard Required Proposed
Lot-Area 10,000 sq ft 8,118 sq ft*
Lot-Width 80’ 65.9’
Building Height Two and one-half stories or
thirty-five feet in height
23’-8 1/2” and two stories
Yard-Side
Yard-Setback
Yard – Sec. Frontage (Olympic)
Yard-Rear
5’ min, 15’ agg (sliding scale)**
20’
15’
15’
5’ min, 26’-6” agg
41’-8 ½”
27’-9”
No rear yard, double frontage
* Small Lot Design Review Required
** Lot was created in 1946, subject to sliding scale per 82-14.004.
As stated in the above table, the proposed addition would conform to the
development standards of the R-10 District, including maximum height, setback
and yard requirements. The subject property is consistent with the lot
requirements for property in the R-10 Single-Family Residential District except
for the 65.9-foot lot width requirements (the lot is required to have 80 feet in
average width), and therefore, the Small Lot Design Review was required.
C. Compatibility with Surrounding Neighborhood: The proposed project must be
found to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms of its
location, size, height, and design in order to approve the Small Lot Design Review
per County Code Section 82-10.002(c). Staff have made the required Small Lot
Design Review findings. These findings are included in attachment 1 – Findings
and Conditions of Approval, to this Staff Report.
D. Appropriateness of the Use: The proposed project is a second story addition to
an existing single-family residence with an extension of an existing porch
attached to the house. As stated in the Staff Report, the project meets the R-10
590
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 9 of 9
Zoning District guidelines and is consistent with the General Plan Single-Family
Residential-Medium Density (SM) Land Use Designation and is consistent with
the Small Lot Occupancy findings. The site and area surrounding this parcel are
zoned for single-family uses and additions to single-family residences are
common development projects in this area, therefore, the project is an
appropriate use of the site.
X. CONCLUSION
The applicant proposes an approximately 1,400-square-foot second story addition
and an approximately 85-square-foot rear covered porch extension. As mentioned
in the Staff Report, the proposed project is consistent with the Single-Family
Residential – Medium Density (SM) General Plan Designation and complies with the
intent and purpose of the R-10 Single-Family Residential Zoning District. With
respect to Small Lot Design Review, the proposed project is compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood in terms of its location, size, height and design. Staff
recommends approval of Development Plan #CDDP23-03020, subject to the
attached findings and conditions of approval.
Attachments:
1. Findings and Conditions of Approval
2. Maps – Parcel Map, General Plan, Zoning, and Aerial Photograph
3. Public Comments
4. Agency Comments
5. Project Plans
591
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP23-03020;
HARPREET HANSRA (APPLICANT & OWNER)
I. FINDINGS
A. Small Lot Design Review Findings
In approving a Development Plan in the R-10 Single-Family Residential District (R-10),
findings are required that the proposed project is consistent with the intent and
purpose of the R-10 district and is compatible with other uses in the vicinity, both
inside and outside the district. For applications that are Development Plans for a Small
Lot Design Review, the Development Plan compatibility findings are the Small Lot
Design Review findings for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, in terms
of its location, size, height, and design.
1. Small Lot Design Review Findings:
The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in terms
of its (a) location, (b) size, (c) height, and (d) design.
a. Location: The project involves a 1,400-square-foot second story addition and a
rear porch extension. The proposed project meets all-setback requirements and
the height requirements of the R-10 Single-Family Residential District. The
location of the addition is compatible as it is a vertical addition and fits within
the footprint of the existing house. The location of the rear porch extension is
compatible as it is extending an existing covered porch located in the rear and
will be fully located underneath the second story addition. The proposed
addition and rear porch extension do not exacerbate existing setback distances
and is located in an area that will not be heavily intrusive to surrounding
neighbors. The addition is designed to be step back from the front and side
first floor which allows for the mass to be broken up at the second level.
Additionally, the addition is not over the garage portion of the existing
residence which allows for views to continue to be maintained behind the
house. As a result, the project would be compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood in terms of setbacks and design.
b. Size: Home sizes in this single-family residential neighborhood and immediate
vicinity range between 2,500 square feet to over 5,000 square feet in size on
lots that range between 7,000 to 15,000 square feet. The residence will have a
total of 3,600 square feet of living space with the second story addition and an
additional 85 square feet for the extension of the covered porch. This is well
592
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 2 of 7
between the range of size for surrounding residences who also have rear
covered porches. The location of the addition will also be stepped back towards
the rear of the house which will decrease the overall size and bulk. The
extension of the rear porch will also be in the rear which will not increase the
overall size and bulk of that area. Therefore, the addition would be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
c. Height: The project meets the R-10 zoning height requirements. The project
meets the maximum story requirement by proposing two stories (where two
and one-half is the maximum) and the maximum height requirement by
proposing a total height of 23’-8 ½” (where 35 feet is the maximum).
Comparably, surrounding homes have heights starting from 15 feet to almost
33 feet tall. Staff has surveyed the surrounding streets including Freeman Road,
Stanley Court, Melody Drive, Hilton Road, Hilton Court, Juanita Drive,
Ponderosa Lane and Manzanita Court and identified numerous residences with
second stories that reside on neighboring streets. Moreover, there are a few
houses with design features that include a high roof pitch with large dormer
windows at a higher roof height which give the impression of it being a two-
story home.
d. Design: The applicant has designed the project to match the overall
characteristic of the neighborhood. The majority of the houses within this area
are either simple craftsman/craftsman-adjacent or ranch style homes that
incorporate various horizonal, vertical siding, shed and gable roofs with tapered
and straight porch posts, wide trims and groupings of one, two or three window
bays. Many homes in this area also incorporate composite shingle roofing while
utilizing an earth rich/neutral color palette for the walls. Staff has reviewed the
neighborhood and has identified that there is no one uniform or consistent
design theme in the neighborhood, but rather houses share a few common
design features with each other. The proposed project will match the roofing
material of neighboring houses by using composite shingle roofing, will match
the color scheme by using a white and blue paint with brown brick to match
the earth rich/neutral color palette of this neighborhood and will incorporate
the craftsman style such as utilizing horizontal lap sliding which is a common
siding material in this area and will match the window bay groupings of two
and three which is a common window grouping style in this area. The project
also matches the vertical siding at the gable ends of the roof which can be
found on several homes in the surrounding neighborhood on Hilton Drive,
Stanley Court, Melody Drive and Freeman Road. Lastly, the project is designed
to be minimally intrusive as it will also incorporate existing design features of
593
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 3 of 7
the single-story such as continuing the shake style siding on one portion of the
walls, will incorporate the same gable roof pitch and is installing a short eave
where the rear porch extension is to soften the bottom edge of the master suite
so the view of the rear appears to be less blocky, thereby making it one cohesive
design.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #CDDP23-03020
Project Approval
Development Plan for a Small Lot Design Review
1. This DEVELOPMENT PLAN for a SMALL LOT DESIGN REVIEW is APPROVED for the
construction of a second story, approximately 1,400-square-foot residential
addition and an approximately 85-square-foot rear porch extension to the existing
single-family residence located at 3455 Freeman Road, Lafayette.
2. The Development Plan approval described above is granted as generally shown on:
• The application and project plans received by the Department of Conservation
and Development, Community Development Division (CDD) on July 3, 2023:
• Supplemental application materials received on August 1, 2023.
3. Any change from the approved plans shall require review and approval by the CDD
and may require the filing of an application to modify this Development Plan.
4. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the work approved under this
Development Plan permit.
Payment of Fees
5. This Development Plan Permit application is subject to an initial application deposit
of $3,000.00, which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and materials
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 2019/553, where a fee payment
is over 60 days past due, the Department of Conservation and Development may
seek a court judgement against the applicant and will charge interest at a rate of
594
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 4 of 7
ten percent (10%) from the date of judgement. The applicant may obtain current
costs by contacting the project planner. A bill will be mailed to the applicant shortly
after permit issuance.
Construction Period Restrictions and Requirements
All construction activity shall comply with the following restrictions, which shall be
included in the construction drawings.
6. The applicant and his contractor shall make a good faith effort to park any
construction related vehicles on the project driveway and existing asphalt parking
area at the front of the parcel.
7. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to minimize project-related disruptions
to adjacent properties, and to uses on the site. This shall be communicated to all
project-related contractors.
8. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all
internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall
locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors as far away
from existing residences as possible.
9. Transportation of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to weekdays
between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. and prohibited on Federal and
State holidays.
10. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of
construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site.
11. A publicly visible sign shall be posted on the property with the telephone number
and person to contact regarding construction-related complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective action within 24 hours. The CDD phone number shall
also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
12. 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:
595
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 5 of 7
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
596
Zoning Administrator – October 2, 2023
CDDP23-03020
Page 6 of 7
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. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant is strongly encouraged to
contact the following agencies to determine if additional requirements and/or
additional permits are required as part of the proposed project:
• Contra Costa County Building Inspection Division
• Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division
• East Bay Municipal Utility District
• Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
• Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
597
598
Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS
Legend
1:564
Notes0.00.01
THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
0.0 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.
General Plan: Single-Family Residential Medium Density (SM)
Board of Supervisors' Districts
City Limits
Unincorporated
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)
WA (Water)599
Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS
Legend
1:564
Notes0.00.01
THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
0.0 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.
Orthophotography
Board of Supervisors' Districts
City Limits
Unincorporated
Address Points
Streets
Building Footprints
Assessment Parcels
World Imagery
Low Resolution 15m Imagery
High Resolution 60cm Imagery
High Resolution 30cm Imagery
Citations
600
Contra Costa County -DOIT GIS
Legend
1:564
Notes0.00.01
THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
0.0 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.
Zoning: R-10 Single-Family Residential District
Board of Supervisors' Districts
City Limits
Unincorporated
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)
A-3, -BS -SG (Boat Storage and Solar Energy Generation)601
602
603
604
605
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
Phone: 925-655-2700
Fax: 925-655-2758
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
Date____________
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
INTERNAL
___ Building Inspection ___ Grading Inspection
___ Advance Planning ___ Housing Programs
___ Trans. Planning ___ Telecom Planner
___ ALUC Staff ___ HCP/NCCP Staff
___ APC PW Staff ___ County Geologist
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
__ Environmental Health __ Hazardous Materials
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
__ Engineering Services (1 Full-size + 3 email Contacts)
__ Traffic
__ Flood Control (Full-size) __ Special Districts
LOCAL
__ Fire District
___ San Ramon Valley – (email) rwendel@srvfire.ca.gov
____ Consolidated – (email) fire@cccfpd.org
____ East CCC – (email) brodriguez@eccfpd.org
__ Sanitary District
__ Water District
__ City of
__ School District(s)
__ LAFCO
__ Reclamation District #_______
__ East Bay Regional Park District
__ Diablo/Discovery Bay/Crockett CSD
__ MAC/TAC
__ Improvement/Community Association
_ CC Mosquito & Vector Control Dist (email)
OTHERS/NON-LOCAL
__ CHRIS (email only: nwic@sonoma.edu)
__ CA Fish and Wildlife, Region 3 – Bay Delta
__ Native American Tribes
ADDITIONAL RECIPIENTS
Please submit your comments to:
Project Planner
Phone #
E-mail
County File #
Prior to
* * * * *
We have found the following special programs apply
to this application:
____ Active Fault Zone (Alquist-Priolo)
____ Flood Hazard Area, Panel #
____ 60-dBA Noise Control
____ CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site
High or Very High FHSZ
* * * * *
AGENCIES: Please indicate the applicable code
section for any recommendation required by law or
ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the
Applicant and Owner.
Comments: ___ None ___ Below ___ Attached
Print Name
Signature DATE
Agency phone #
REVISED 08/12/2019. TO PRINT MORE COPIES: G:\Current Planning\APC\APC Forms\CURRENT FORMS\PLANNING\Agency Comment Request.doc
7/13/23
Central San
EBMUD
Lafayette
Everett Louie
925-655-2873
CDDP23-03020
Aug. 1, 2023
B
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us
Jeremy Shannon
606
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
Phone: 925-655-2700
Fax: 925-655-2758
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
Date____________
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
INTERNAL
___ Building Inspection ___ Grading Inspection
___ Advance Planning ___ Housing Programs
___ Trans. Planning ___ Telecom Planner
___ ALUC Staff ___ HCP/NCCP Staff
___ APC PW Staff ___ County Geologist
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
__ Environmental Health __ Hazardous Materials
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
__ Engineering Services (1 Full-size + 3 email Contacts)
__ Traffic
__ Flood Control (Full-size) __ Special Districts
LOCAL
__ Fire District
___ San Ramon Valley – (email) rwendel@srvfire.ca.gov
____ Consolidated – (email) fire@cccfpd.org
____ East CCC – (email) brodriguez@eccfpd.org
__ Sanitary District
__ Water District
__ City of
__ School District(s)
__ LAFCO
__ Reclamation District #_______
__ East Bay Regional Park District
__ Diablo/Discovery Bay/Crockett CSD
__ MAC/TAC
__ Improvement/Community Association
_ CC Mosquito & Vector Control Dist (email)
OTHERS/NON-LOCAL
__ CHRIS (email only: nwic@sonoma.edu)
__ CA Fish and Wildlife, Region 3 – Bay Delta
__ Native American Tribes
ADDITIONAL RECIPIENTS
Please submit your comments to:
Project Planner
Phone #
E-mail
County File #
Prior to
* * * * *
We have found the following special programs apply
to this application:
____ Active Fault Zone (Alquist-Priolo)
____ Flood Hazard Area, Panel #
____ 60-dBA Noise Control
____ CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site
High or Very High FHSZ
* * * * *
AGENCIES: Please indicate the applicable code
section for any recommendation required by law or
ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the
Applicant and Owner.
Comments: ___ None ___ Below ___ Attached
Print Name
Signature DATE
Agency phone #
REVISED 08/12/2019. TO PRINT MORE COPIES: G:\Current Planning\APC\APC Forms\CURRENT FORMS\PLANNING\Agency Comment Request.doc 607
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
30 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553-4601
Phone: 925-655-2700
Fax: 925-655-2758
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
Date____________
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
INTERNAL
___ Building Inspection ___ Grading Inspection
___ Advance Planning ___ Housing Programs
___ Trans. Planning ___ Telecom Planner
___ ALUC Staff ___ HCP/NCCP Staff
___ APC PW Staff ___ County Geologist
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
__ Environmental Health __ Hazardous Materials
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
__ Engineering Services (1 Full-size + 3 email Contacts)
__ Traffic
__ Flood Control (Full-size) __ Special Districts
LOCAL
__ Fire District
___ San Ramon Valley – (email) rwendel@srvfire.ca.gov
____ Consolidated – (email) fire@cccfpd.org
____ East CCC – (email) brodriguez@eccfpd.org
__ Sanitary District
__ Water District
__ City of
__ School District(s)
__ LAFCO
__ Reclamation District #_______
__ East Bay Regional Park District
__ Diablo/Discovery Bay/Crockett CSD
__ MAC/TAC
__ Improvement/Community Association
_ CC Mosquito & Vector Control Dist (email)
OTHERS/NON-LOCAL
__ CHRIS (email only: nwic@sonoma.edu)
__ CA Fish and Wildlife, Region 3 – Bay Delta
__ Native American Tribes
ADDITIONAL RECIPIENTS
Please submit your comments to:
Project Planner
Phone #
E-mail
County File #
Prior to
* * * * *
We have found the following special programs apply
to this application:
____ Active Fault Zone (Alquist-Priolo)
____ Flood Hazard Area, Panel #
____ 60-dBA Noise Control
____ CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site
High or Very High FHSZ
* * * * *
AGENCIES: Please indicate the applicable code
section for any recommendation required by law or
ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the
Applicant and Owner.
Comments: ___ None ___ Below ___ Attached
Print Name
Signature DATE
Agency phone #
REVISED 08/12/2019. TO PRINT MORE COPIES: G:\Current Planning\APC\APC Forms\CURRENT FORMS\PLANNING\Agency Comment Request.doc
7/13/23
Central San
EBMUD
Lafayette
Everett Louie
925-655-2873
CDDP23-03020
Aug. 1, 2023
B
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
everett.louie@dcd.cccounty.us
608
1
Everett Louie
From:Russ Leavitt <RLeavitt@centralsan.org>
Sent:Friday, July 14, 2023 1:15 PM
To:Anne Nounou; Everett Louie
Subject:CDDP23-03020; residential addition, 2455 Freeman Rd., Walnut Creek CA 94595; 185-211-014; X1552
The property already receives Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San) sanitary sewer service via a
six-inch diameter public main sewer on Freeman Rd. The proposed addition would not be expected to
produce an unmanageable added capacity demand on the wastewater system, nor interfere with existing
public facilities. The applicant should promptly submit full-size building plans for Central San to review and pay
all appropriate fees, including for capping and abandoning or reusing the existing sewer lateral due to roof
removal. For more information, the applicant should contact the Central San Permit Section at (925) 229-
7371. Thanks!
From: Anne Nounou <Anne.Nounou@dcd.cccounty.us>
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 10:10 AM
To: Russ Leavitt <RLeavitt@centralsan.org>
Subject: RE: Anne Nounou shared "CDDP23‐03020 Agency Comments" with you.
From: Russ Leavitt <RLeavitt@centralsan.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 5:20 PM
To: Anne Nounou <Anne.Nounou@dcd.cccounty.us>
Subject: RE: Anne Nounou shared "CDDP23‐03020 Agency Comments" with you.
Please send me an open version.
609
REVIEW OF AGENCY PLANNING APPLICATION
THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE WATER SERVICES
The technical data supplied herein is based on preliminary information, is subject to revision and is to be used for planning purpose
ONLY
DATE: 03/27/2023 EBMUD MAP(S): 1542B508 EBMUD FILE:S-11381
AGENCY:Department of Conservation and
Development
Attn: Maria Laura-Lemus
30 Muir Road
MARTINEZ, CA 94553
AGENCY FILE: CDVR23-01014 FILE TYPE: Variance
APPLICANT:Harpreet Hansra
1968 Fair Ridge Court
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
OWNER:Same as applicant
,
DEVELOPMENT DATA
ADDRESS/LOCATION: 3455 Freeman Road City:LAFAYETTE Zip Code: 94595-1311
ZONING:R-10 PREVIOUS LAND USE: Existing residence
DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks variance approval authorizing a 10-ft. aggregate sideyard
where 15-ft. is required for a 1,400 sq. ft. second story addition to an existing single-family
residence.
TOTAL ACREAGE:0.19 ac.
TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT:
Single Family Residential:1 Units
WATER SERVICES DATA
PROPERTY: in EBMUD
ELEVATION RANGES OF
STREETS:
198-200
ELEVATION RANGE OF
PROPERTY TO BE
DEVELOPED:
198-200
All of development may be served from existing main(s)
Location of Main(s):Freeman Road
PRESSURE ZONE SERVICE ELEVATION RANGE
H1A 50-250
None from main extension(s)
Location of Existing Main(s):
PRESSURE ZONE SERVICE ELEVATION RANGE
COMMENTS
When the development plans are finalized, the project sponsor should contact EBMUD's New Business Office and request a water
service estimate to determine the costs and conditions of providing water service to the development. Engineering and installation
of water mains and meters requires substantial lead time, which should be provided for in the project sponsor's development
schedule. No water meters are allowed to be located in driveways. The project sponsor should be aware that Section 31 of
EBMUD's Water Service Regulations requires that water service shall not be furnished for new or expanded service unless all the
applicable water-efficiency measures described in the regulation are installed at the project sponsor's expense. Due to EBMUD's
limited water supply, all customers should plan for shortages in time of drought.
EBMUD owns and operates a 20-inch water distribution pipeline in an EBMUD right of way (R/W 1981) adjacent to the southern
boundary of this property on Olympic Boulevard. This pipeline provides water service to the existing residential property. The
integrity of this pipeline needs to be maintained at all times. Any proposed construction activity within the right of way would need to
be coordinated with EBMUD and may require relocation of the pipeline and/or right of way, at the project sponsor's expense. No
buildings or structures shall be constructed in EBMUD's right of way unless specific approval is given by EBMUD.
LJ
CC: M. Elawady
CHARGES & OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE:
Contact the EBMUD New Business Office at (510)287-1008.
________________________________________
Chien Wang,Associate Civil Engineer; DATE
WATER SERVICE PLANNING SECTION
610
611
612
SIDE
5' - 0"
SIDE
5' - 0"32' - 8"FREEMAN ROAD
OLYMPIC BLVD
(E) FENCE LINE (E) CONC. WALK(E) ASPHALT
DRIVEWAY
(E) ASPHALT PARKING AREA
(E) ROLLED
CURB
(E) TREE: MODESTO ASH
CIRCUMFERENCE: 95"23' - 1"14' - 0"(E) 9'x18'
PARKING, TYP.
(E) DRIP LINE
N 71° 49' 50" E121.91'N 71° 49' 50" E123.53'N 72° 10' 10" W
66.00'
S 69° 43' 10" E
66.02'WALKPUBLICSIDE19' - 0"8' - 0"3' - 0"
1' - 0"9' - 0"(E) STRUCTURE
TO BE REMOVED,
FILL IN WITH
GROUND COVER
OR TURF
(E) YARD
TOOL SHED
TO REMAIN
15' - 0"(E) FIREPLACE
TO REMAIN
(E) GATE TO
REMAIN
(E) WOOD
FENCE
HEIGHT: 7'-0"
(E) GARAGE
(E) PORCH
(E) GATE TO
REMAIN(E) CONC. WALKDIRECTION
OF DRAINAGE
(SHEET)27' - 9"REAR SETBACK15' - 0"FRONT SETBACK20' - 0"SHEET INDEX
A-1.......................................
A-2.......................................
A-3.......................................
A-4.......................................
COVER SHEET, NOTES AND SITE PLAN
DEMO AND NEW FIRST FLOOR PLANS
SECOND FLOOR AND ROOF PLANS
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING INFO
ZONE:R-10
OCCUPANCY TYPE:R
CONSTRUCTION TYPE:V-B
YEAR BUILT:N/A
AREA, EXISTING:2,200 SF
AREA, NEW:1,400 SF
SCOPE OF WORK
CONSTRUCTION OF SECOND FLOOR, FIRST FLOOR REMODEL AND
REROOF
SITE LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
SETBACK
FENCE
(E) ASPHALT (1,126 SF)
(E) CONCRETE (APPX 1,743 SF)
(E) TURF/GROUND COVER (APPX 2,878 SF)
APN# 185-211-014-5
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAME
SCALE
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODELREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL
As indicated
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCE
JMORROW A1
COVER SHEET, NOTES AND
SITE PLAN HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCEHANSRA AND DHALIWAL
RESIDENCE 2ND FLOOR
ADD'N AND REMODEL
HARPREET HANSRA AND
SUNNY DHALIWAL
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYEETTE, CA 94595
3/32" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN
VICINITY MAP
EXISTING
BLDG COVERAGE 2,941 SF (36.2%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,173 SF (14.5%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 2,878 SF (35.4%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
LANDSCAPE LOT COVERAGE ANALYSIS
PROPOSED
BLDG COVERAGE 2,670 SF (32.9%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,173 SF (14.5%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 3,149 SF (38.7%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
SIDE
5' - 0"
SIDE
21' - 6"FRONT41' - 8 1/2"REAR27' - 9"- SECOND FLOOR
3/32" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN32
05/05/2023
A-4.......................................EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A-5......................................EXISTING AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES
A-6......................................EXISTING PROPERTIES (OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET)
EXISTING
BLDG COVERAGE 3,053 SF (37.6%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,061 SF (13.1%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 2,878 SF (35.4%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
PROPOSED
BLDG COVERAGE 2,782 SF (34.3%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,061 SF (13.1%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 3,149 SF (38.7%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
613
CooktopUP
4' - 0"2' - 6"2' - 2"4' - 0"4' - 0"APPX 6' - 6"
4' - 2"
334 SF
FAMILY
459 SF
KITCHEN
34 SF
1/2 BATH
41 SF
PANTRY45 SF
BATH84 SF
OFFICE217 SF
PLAY RM
47 SF
MUD RM45 SF
BATH
319 SF
GARAGE
224 SF
LIVING/DINING
203 SF
BED 129 SF
ENTRY
4' - 10"APPX 27' - 3"12' - 0"17' - 0"10' - 0"8' - 4 1/2"16' - 6 1/2"
8' - 8"
EXISTING LEVEL 1
WDWS TO
REMAIN, U.O.N.
NEW GLASS
SLIDING DOOR
w/SIDE LIGHTS
3
A4
3
A4
6
A4
6
A4
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW A201/23/2023
DEMO AND NEW FLOOR
PLANS
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL
RESIDENCE 2ND FLOOR
ADD'N AND REMODEL
HARPREET HANSRA AND
SUNNY DHALIWAL
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYEETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCE3/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1 - NEW
3/16" = 1'-0"2 LEVEL 1 - DEMO
614
158 SF
BED
168 SF
BED
186 SF
BED
173 SF
LOFT
32 SF
BATH
66 SF
LAUNDRY
226 SF
BED
51 SF
CLOSET
76 SF
BATH
OPEN
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSET
34 SF
VANITY
12 SF
TLT
17' - 2 1/2"18' - 4"4' - 0 1/2"22' - 1"28' - 4 1/2"2' - 0"52' - 6"39' - 7"
6
A4
6
A4
3
A4
3
A4
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW A309/21/2023
DEMO ROOF AND NEW
SECOND FLOOR PLANS
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCE3/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 2 - NEW
HATCHED EXTENTS TO
BE MODIFIED TO
RECEIVE SECOND
FLOOR ADDITION
3/16" = 1'-0"1 ROOF - DEMO
615
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
J MORROW A3.109/21/2023
ROOF PLAN
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL
RESIDENCE 2ND FLOOR
ADD'N AND REMODEL
HARPREET HANSRA AND
SUNNY DHALIWAL
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYEETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCESHEET METAL GUTTER
o/2x8 FASCIA
COMP SHINGLE
ROOFING, 'COOL'
COLOR
FLAT SKYLIGHT,
TYP.
(E) CHIMNEY
TO REMAIN
3/16" = 1'-0"2 ROOF
616
EXISTING 1ST FLR RIDGE14' - 1 1/2"NEW 2ND FLR RIDGE23' - 8 1/2"SHEET METAL GUTTER o/2x8
FASCIA,TYP., COLOR: WHITE
COMP SHINGLE
ROOFING, 'COOL' COLOR
HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING. TYP., COLOR: SLATE BLUE
SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS, TYP.,FRAME COLOR: WHITE
NEW ROOFING
o/EXISTING
SHEATHING/FRAMING,
TO MATCH ADD'N
EXISTING CEMENT
PLASTER, PAINTED
COLOR: WHITE
SHAKE STYLE
SIDING, TYP.
COLOR: WHITE
VERTICAL
SIDING
COLOR: WHITE
EXISTING
GARAGE DOOR
EXISTING FIXED
BAY WINDOWS
(E) WALL SCONCE
BRICK WAINSCOT,
COLOR: WARM GRAY/BROWN
EXISTING PORCH
RAILING, COLOR: BLACK
EXISTING14' - 6"3
A4
ENTRY/
STAIR
LAUNDRYENSUITE
HALL
FAMILY 1/2 BATH PANTRY HALL CLOSET
6
A4
BED LAUNDRY VANITY LOFT
KITCHEN PANTRY BATH OFFICE REC ROOM
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW A4
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCE3/16" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"5 EAST ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"4 WEST ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"6 SECTION - 2
3/16" = 1'-0"3 SECTION - 1
05/05/2023 617
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCEWOOD LAP SIDING
WAINSCOT
REAR ELEVATION
CEMENT PLASTER
HORIZ. WOOD
SIDING WAINSCOT
BRICK WAINSCOT AT
PORCH PERIMETER
HORIZ. WOOD
SIDING WAINSCOT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOFING
WOOD BOARD
AND BATTEN SIDING
WOOD LAP SIDING
WAINSCOT
CEMENT PLASTER
CEMENT PLASTERCEMENT PLASTER
FRONT EAST PERSPECTIVE FRONT WEST PERSPECTIVE
REAR DETAIL - PORCH REAR ELEVATION
EAST
FRONT ELEVATION
EXISTING HOUSE
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
05/05/2023 A5
A6
EXISTING AND NEIGHBORING
PROPERTIES3447 FREEMAN RD 3455 FREEMAN RD
3447 FREEMAN RD
3447 FREEMAN RD
3455 FREEMAN RD
COMP SHINGLE
ROOFING
CEMENT PLASTER
3463 FREEMAN RD
3463 FREEMAN RD3445 FREEMAN RD 3463 FREEMAN RD
3455 FREEMAN RDWOOD SHAKE
SIDING
COMPE SHINGLE
ROOFING
3463
FREEMAN RD 3455 FREEMAN RD 3447 FREEMAN RD
MAP - ADJACENT PROPERTIES
3454 FREEMAN RD
3448 FREEMAN RD
FREEMA
N
R
DSTANLEY CTOLYMPI
C
B
L
V
D
618
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCE05/05/2023 A6
EXISTING PROPERTIES -
OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
3463 FREEMAN RD 3455 FREEMAN RD 3447 FREEMAN RD
MAP - ADJACENT PROPERTIES
3454 FREEMAN RD
3448
FREEMAN RD
FREEMA
N
R
DSTANLEY CTOLYMPI
C
B
L
V
D
3454 FREEMAN RD
FRONT WEST PERSPECTIVE FRONT ELEVATION FRONT EAST PERSPECTIVE
FRONT EAST PERSPECTIVEFRONT ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION (ON STANLEY CT)
3454 FREEMAN RD 3454 FREEMAN RD
3448 FREEMAN RD3448 FREEMAN RD3448 FREEMAN RD
COMPE SHINGLE
ROOFING
HORIZ WOODLAP SIDING
COMPE SHINGLE
ROOFING
HORIZ WOOD
LAP SIDING
619
APPEAL OF 3455 FREEMAN ROAD –SECOND STORY ADDITION
County File #CDDP23-03020
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 24, 2024
EVERETT LOUIE, PROJECT PLANNER
CONTACT: EVERETT.LOUIE@DCD.CCCCOUNTY.US 925-655-2873 1 620
Today’s Presentation 2
PROJECT
BACKGROUND
PROJECT OVERVIEW APPEAL SUMMARY STAFF
RECOMMENDATION
2 621
AERIAL VIEW
3 622
General Plan: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY (SM)
4 623
Zoning: R-10 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
5 624
6
SITE PHOTOS-REAR
625
7
SITE PHOTOS-FRONT
626
Project Description
Design Review Development Plan
■Parcel is Substandard
–8,118 SF where 10,000 is the minimum
–65.9’ width where 80’ is the minimum
■Approximately 1,400-square-foot second story residential addition
–Increase SF from 2,200 SF to 3,600 SF.
■Confirms to R-10 Standards
–5’ min side and 26’-6” agg where 5’ min and 15’ agg is
required
–41’-8 ½” front where 20’ is required
–27’-9” secondary frontage where 15’ is required
■Maximum height of 23’-8 ½” feet where 35 feet is the maximum 8 627
PROJECT DRAWINGS
9 628
Site Plan:
10 629
Elevations: Proposed
11 630
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The proposed project is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section
15301(e)(2), Addition to Existing Structure
■Additions of no more than 10,000 Square Feet
■Adequately served by public services
12 631
Appeal Points
(summary)
As the basis for their appeal, the appellants mentioned various concerns such as:
–Notice for the Zoning Administrator Public Hearing was deficient
–The project was not compared to other substandard lots and the project size is incompatible.
–The County relied exclusively on homes outside of the immediate neighborhood for compatibility and there are no two-story homes within 1,000 feet.
–Two -story homes on substandard lots negatively impact the neighborhood.
–The property owner has not contacted the neighbors to discuss the project. 13 632
Appeal Points
■County Code Section 26-2.2004,
requires that a Notice be mailed at least
10 days prior to the hearing. County Staff
has a signed affidavit dated September
19, 2023, which declares that the
County mailed the notices 12 calendar
days before.
■County Code requires compatibility to be
reviewed with respect to the entire
surrounding neighborhood. The County
does not omit certain lots due to lot size.
The Saranap Community contains
numerous homes within the project
range.
Public Hearing Notice Was Deficient
Project should only be compared to other substandard lots andt he project size is incompatible
14 633
Appeal Points
■The County surveyed the Saranap
neighborhood and identified many
houses within 1,000 feet that are two-
stories or have two-story elements.
■The project meets the R-10 zoning code
development standards and the design
of project reduces privacy infringement.
The Small Lot Design Review findings
support the project compatibility.
■This is not a requirement in the County
Ordinance or Development Plan
application.
No two-story homes in the “neighborhood”
Two -story homes on substandard lots negatively impact the neighborhood privacy.
The applicant made no effort to discuss the project with neighbors. 15 634
Photos of Surrounding Compatible Homes
16
25 Hilton Court
(617 FT North)
3522 Freeman Road
621 FT North)
3448 Freeman Road
57 FT North)
835 Juanita Drive
(957 FT North)
3559 Melody Drive
(750 FT East)
144 Ponderosa Lane
(766 FT north)
635
Staff Conclusion
■The project is consistent with the applicable policies/standards of:
–County General Plan
–Zoning Consistency
–Small Lot Design Review Findings
■The project is a residential addition and promotes residential development
growth that is consistent with the Saranap neighborhood.
17 636
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission:
■DENY the appeal by Jason and Iva Schwarz,et al
■APPROVE the project based on the findings and conditions of approval
18 637
QUESTIONS?
19 638
2727 SF
2914 SF
3087 SF
3234 SF
3608 SF
2649 SF
2036 SF
4354 SF
2733 SF
3015 SF
2347 SF
1794 SF
2746 SF
2697 SF
3227 SF
2884 SF
2282 SF2850 SF2674 SF
2079 SF
2358 SF
3427 SF
3668 SF
1453 SF
2693 SF 2224 SF
1680 SF
2056 SF
1651 SF
3573 SF1506 SF
2120 SF
3398 SF
2645 SF
1516 SF
2504 SF3325 SF1516 SF
3285 SF
3087 SF 2210 SF
1742 SF
2362 SF
1936 SF
2925 SF
2049 SF
2313 SF
1673 SF
2776 SF
2055 SF
1084 SF
2346 SF
1457 SF
2507 SF
2994 SF
2055 SF
1530 SF
1414 SF
2044 SF
2907 SF
2531 SF
2446 SF
1876 SF
1543 SF
2574 SF
1856 SF
1456 SF
2610 SF
4433 SF
2037 SF
1586 SF
1404 SF
1450 SF
3213 SF
1664 SF
2148 SF
2040 SF
1685 SF
1118 SF
1158 SF
2187 SF
1950 SF
2064 SF
1961 SF
1472 SF
1233 SF
1753 SF
3213 SF
1927 SF2856 SF
1921 SF
2210 SF
1641 SF
1713 SF
2082 SF
2688 SF
1889 SF 2827 SF
2882 SF
1652 SF
2657 SF1313 SF 2337 SF1664 SF 1619 SF
1967 SF
2984 SF 1855 SF2200 SF
1925 SF1530 SF
2209 SF
1524 SF
954 SF
1314 SF
1881 SF
2228 SF
1272 SF
1364 SF
1689 SF
1271 SF
1971 SF
1204 SF
1225 SF
2044 SF2106 SF
2034 SF
1815 SF
1514 SF
2082 SF
1855 SF
1447 SF
1529 SF
1780 SF
2843 SF
1225 SF
2028 SF
1225 SF
2341 SF
1657 SF
2039 SF
1333 SF
1345 SF
1263 SF
1718 SF1830 SF
1648 SF
927 SF
1314 SF 1330 SF
927 SF
2423 SF1921 SF1610 SF
1858 SF
1615 SF
2223 SF
2844 SF
Lafayette
Olympic
B
l
v
d
Olympic
B
l
v
d
Freeman Rd
Juanita Dr
Olympic
B
l
v
d
Boulevard
W
ay
W Newel
l
A
v
e
WindtreeCt KinneyDrKing DrHilton Rd
Newel
l
Ct
Pon d e rosaLnSanfordLnFreeman Ct
Hilton Ct
u
rt
o
l
a
Bl
vdMelody DrC
a
r
r
o
l
P
l
Acac iaRdStanley Ctev
a
r
d
C
t
Evergreen CtM
a
n
z
a
n
i
t
a
C
t
ElDoradoRdMap Created 10/31/2023
by Contra Costa County Department of
Conservation and Development, GIS Group
30 Muir Road, Martinez, CA 94553
37:59:41.791N 122:07:03.756WI019038095
Feet This map was created by the Contra Costa County Department of Conservation and
Development with data from the Contra Costa County GIS Program. Some
base data, primarily City Limits, is derived from the CA State Board of Equalization's
tax rate areas. While obligated to use this data the County assumes no responsibility for
its accuracy. This 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.(Aerial Photo taken 2019)
Project Site
Two story homes
Project Study Area
Single story homes with two story elements
Parcels
Lafayette City Limits
CDDP23-03020: Map of compatible homes within the Saranap Neighborhood
639
SIDE
5' - 0"
SIDE
5' - 0"32' - 8"FREEMAN ROAD
OLYMPIC BLVD
(E) FENCE LINE (E) CONC. WALK(E) ASPHALT
DRIVEWAY
(E) ASPHALT PARKING AREA
(E) ROLLED
CURB
(E) TREE: MODESTO ASH
CIRCUMFERENCE: 95"23' - 1"14' - 0"(E) 9'x18'
PARKING, TYP.
(E) DRIP LINE
N 71° 49' 50" E121.91'N 71° 49' 50" E123.53'N 72° 10' 10" W
66.00'
S 69° 43' 10" E
66.02'WALKPUBLICSIDE19' - 0"8' - 0"3' - 0"
1' - 0"9' - 0"(E) STRUCTURE
TO BE REMOVED,
FILL IN WITH
GROUND COVER
OR TURF
(E) YARD
TOOL SHED
TO REMAIN
15' - 0"(E) FIREPLACE
TO REMAIN
(E) GATE TO
REMAIN
(E) WOOD
FENCE
HEIGHT: 7'-0"
(E) GARAGE
(E) PORCH
(E) GATE TO
REMAIN(E) CONC. WALKDIRECTION
OF DRAINAGE
(SHEET)27' - 9"REAR SETBACK15' - 0"FRONT SETBACK20' - 0"SHEET INDEX
A-1.......................................
A-2.......................................
A-3.......................................
A-4.......................................
COVER SHEET, NOTES AND SITE PLAN
DEMO AND NEW FIRST FLOOR PLANS
SECOND FLOOR AND ROOF PLANS
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
BUILDING INFO
ZONE:R-10
OCCUPANCY TYPE:R
CONSTRUCTION TYPE:V-B
YEAR BUILT:N/A
AREA, EXISTING:2,200 SF
AREA, NEW:1,400 SF
SCOPE OF WORK
CONSTRUCTION OF SECOND FLOOR, FIRST FLOOR REMODEL AND
REROOF
SITE LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
SETBACK
FENCE
(E) ASPHALT (1,126 SF)
(E) CONCRETE (APPX 1,743 SF)
(E) TURF/GROUND COVER (APPX 2,878 SF)
APN# 185-211-014-5
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAME
SCALE
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODELREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL
As indicated
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCE
JMORROW A1
COVER SHEET, NOTES AND
SITE PLAN HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCEHANSRA AND DHALIWAL
RESIDENCE 2ND FLOOR
ADD'N AND REMODEL
HARPREET HANSRA AND
SUNNY DHALIWAL
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYEETTE, CA 94595
3/32" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN
VICINITY MAP
EXISTING
BLDG COVERAGE 2,941 SF (36.2%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,173 SF (14.5%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 2,878 SF (35.4%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
LANDSCAPE LOT COVERAGE ANALYSIS
PROPOSED
BLDG COVERAGE 2,670 SF (32.9%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,173 SF (14.5%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 3,149 SF (38.7%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
SIDE
5' - 0"
SIDE
21' - 6"FRONT41' - 8 1/2"REAR27' - 9"- SECOND FLOOR
3/32" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN32
05/05/2023
A-4.......................................EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A-5......................................EXISTING AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES
A-6......................................EXISTING PROPERTIES (OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET)
EXISTING
BLDG COVERAGE 3,053 SF (37.6%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,061 SF (13.1%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 2,878 SF (35.4%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
PROPOSED
BLDG COVERAGE 2,782 SF (34.3%)
ASPHALT 1,126 SF (13.9%)
CONCRETE 1,061 SF (13.1%)
TURF/GROUND COVER 3,149 SF (38.7%)
TOTAL LOT AREA 8,118 SF
640
CooktopUP
4' - 0"2' - 6"2' - 2"4' - 0"4' - 0"APPX 6' - 6"
4' - 2"
334 SF
FAMILY
459 SF
KITCHEN
34 SF
1/2 BATH
41 SF
PANTRY45 SF
BATH84 SF
OFFICE217 SF
PLAY RM
47 SF
MUD RM45 SF
BATH
319 SF
GARAGE
224 SF
LIVING/DINING
203 SF
BED 129 SF
ENTRY
4' - 10"APPX 27' - 3"12' - 0"17' - 0"10' - 0"8' - 4 1/2"16' - 6 1/2"
8' - 8"
EXISTING LEVEL 1
WDWS TO
REMAIN, U.O.N.
NEW GLASS
SLIDING DOOR
w/SIDE LIGHTS
3
A4
3
A4
6
A4
6
A4
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW A201/23/2023
DEMO AND NEW FLOOR
PLANS
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL
RESIDENCE 2ND FLOOR
ADD'N AND REMODEL
HARPREET HANSRA AND
SUNNY DHALIWAL
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYEETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCE3/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1 - NEW
3/16" = 1'-0"2 LEVEL 1 - DEMO
641
158 SF
BED
168 SF
BED
186 SF
BED
173 SF
LOFT
32 SF
BATH
66 SF
LAUNDRY
226 SF
BED
51 SF
CLOSET
76 SF
BATH
OPEN
CLOSET
CLOSET
CLOSET
34 SF
VANITY
12 SF
TLT
17' - 2 1/2"18' - 4"4' - 0 1/2"22' - 1"28' - 4 1/2"2' - 0"52' - 6"39' - 7"
6
A4
6
A4
3
A4
3
A4
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW A309/21/2023
DEMO ROOF AND NEW
SECOND FLOOR PLANS
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCE3/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 2 - NEW
HATCHED EXTENTS TO
BE MODIFIED TO
RECEIVE SECOND
FLOOR ADDITION
3/16" = 1'-0"1 ROOF - DEMO
642
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
J MORROW A3.109/21/2023
ROOF PLAN
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL
RESIDENCE 2ND FLOOR
ADD'N AND REMODEL
HARPREET HANSRA AND
SUNNY DHALIWAL
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYEETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA AND DHALIWAL RESIDENCESHEET METAL GUTTER
o/2x8 FASCIA
COMP SHINGLE
ROOFING, 'COOL'
COLOR
FLAT SKYLIGHT,
TYP.
(E) CHIMNEY
TO REMAIN
3/16" = 1'-0"2 ROOF
643
EXISTING 1ST FLR RIDGE14' - 1 1/2"NEW 2ND FLR RIDGE23' - 8 1/2"SHEET METAL GUTTER o/2x8
FASCIA,TYP., COLOR: WHITE
COMP SHINGLE
ROOFING, 'COOL' COLOR
HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING. TYP., COLOR: SLATE BLUE
SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS, TYP.,FRAME COLOR: WHITE
NEW ROOFING
o/EXISTING
SHEATHING/FRAMING,
TO MATCH ADD'N
EXISTING CEMENT
PLASTER, PAINTED
COLOR: WHITE
SHAKE STYLE
SIDING, TYP.
COLOR: WHITE
VERTICAL
SIDING
COLOR: WHITE
EXISTING
GARAGE DOOR
EXISTING FIXED
BAY WINDOWS
(E) WALL SCONCE
BRICK WAINSCOT,
COLOR: WARM GRAY/BROWN
EXISTING PORCH
RAILING, COLOR: BLACK
EXISTING14' - 6"3
A4
ENTRY/
STAIR
LAUNDRYENSUITE
HALL
FAMILY 1/2 BATH PANTRY HALL CLOSET
6
A4
BED LAUNDRY VANITY LOFT
KITCHEN PANTRY BATH OFFICE REC ROOM
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW A4
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCE3/16" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"5 EAST ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"4 WEST ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"6 SECTION - 2
3/16" = 1'-0"3 SECTION - 1
05/05/2023 644
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCEWOOD LAP SIDING
WAINSCOT
REAR ELEVATION
CEMENT PLASTER
HORIZ. WOOD
SIDING WAINSCOT
BRICK WAINSCOT AT
PORCH PERIMETER
HORIZ. WOOD
SIDING WAINSCOT
COMP. SHINGLE
ROOFING
WOOD BOARD
AND BATTEN SIDING
WOOD LAP SIDING
WAINSCOT
CEMENT PLASTER
CEMENT PLASTERCEMENT PLASTER
FRONT EAST PERSPECTIVE FRONT WEST PERSPECTIVE
REAR DETAIL - PORCH REAR ELEVATION
EAST
FRONT ELEVATION
EXISTING HOUSE
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
05/05/2023 A5
A6
EXISTING AND NEIGHBORING
PROPERTIES3447 FREEMAN RD 3455 FREEMAN RD
3447 FREEMAN RD
3447 FREEMAN RD
3455 FREEMAN RD
COMP SHINGLE
ROOFING
CEMENT PLASTER
3463 FREEMAN RD
3463 FREEMAN RD3445 FREEMAN RD 3463 FREEMAN RD
3455 FREEMAN RDWOOD SHAKE
SIDING
COMPE SHINGLE
ROOFING
3463
FREEMAN RD 3455 FREEMAN RD 3447 FREEMAN RD
MAP - ADJACENT PROPERTIES
3454 FREEMAN RD
3448 FREEMAN RD
FREEMA
N
R
DSTANLEY CTOLYMPI
C
B
L
V
D
645
DRAWN BY
DATE
SHEET NAMEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BUILDER
OWNER
PROJECT NAME
SCALE
OWNER, PROJECT INFO
APN# 185-211-014-5
SHEET NO.2ND FLOOR ADD'N AND REMODEL3/16" = 1'-0"
JMORROW
HANSRA RESIDENCE 2ND
FLOOR ADD'N AND
REMODEL
HANSRA RESIDENCE
3455 FREEMAN RD
LAFAYETTE, CA 94595
HANSRA RESIDENCE05/05/2023 A6
EXISTING PROPERTIES -
OPPOSITE SIDE OF STREET
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
3463 FREEMAN RD 3455 FREEMAN RD 3447 FREEMAN RD
MAP - ADJACENT PROPERTIES
3454 FREEMAN RD
3448
FREEMAN RD
FREEMA
N
R
DSTANLEY CTOLYMPI
C
B
L
V
D
3454 FREEMAN RD
FRONT WEST PERSPECTIVE FRONT ELEVATION FRONT EAST PERSPECTIVE
FRONT EAST PERSPECTIVEFRONT ELEVATIONWEST ELEVATION (ON STANLEY CT)
3454 FREEMAN RD 3454 FREEMAN RD
3448 FREEMAN RD3448 FREEMAN RD3448 FREEMAN RD
COMPE SHINGLE
ROOFING
HORIZ WOODLAP SIDING
COMPE SHINGLE
ROOFING
HORIZ WOOD
LAP SIDING
646
APPEAL OF 3455 FREEMAN ROAD –SECOND STORY ADDITION
County File #CDDP23-03020
Contra Costa County Board Of Supervisors
March 26, 2024
1 647
Background
■May 31, 2023 –County File #CDSL23-00048 was submitted to the
Department of Conservation and Development.
■June 8, 2023 –Notice of opportunity to request a public hearing.
■July 3, 2023 –County File #CDDP23-03020 was submitted to the
Department of Conservation and Development.
■October 2, 2023 –Zoning Administrator approved County File
#CDDP23-03020.
■January 24, 2024 –Planning Commission approved County File
#CDDP23-03020.
■February 5, 2024 –Lindsey and Logan Daniels filed an appeal of
the Planning Commission's decision.
2 648
PARCEL OVERVIEW
3 649
SITE PHOTOS
650
Project Description
Design Review Development Plan
■Parcel is Substandard
–8,118 SF where 10,000 is the minimum
–65.9’ width where 80’ is the minimum
■Approximately 1,400-square-foot second story residential addition
–Increase SF from 2,200 SF to 3,600 SF.
■Confirms to R-10 Standards
–5’ min side and 26’-6” agg where 5’ min and 15’ agg is
required
–41’-8 ½” front where 20’ is required
–27’-9” secondary frontage where 15’ is required
■Maximum height of 23’-8 ½” feet where 35 feet is the maximum 5 651
Site Plan:
6 652
Elevations: Proposed
7 653
Appeal Points
(summary)
Appellant(s), Lindsey and
Logan Daniels –3434
Freeman Road, Walnut Creek,
CA 94595
As the basis for their appeal, the appellants mentioned various concerns such as:
–The Small Lot Occupancy analysis was done on dwellings not within the surrounding neighborhood.
–The County failed to give proper notices required by Law.
–Public Comment Letters submitted on 10/12/2022 and 1/22/22024 which included similar appeal points and stated that the applicant did not engage in dialogue with neighbors and that the County only supports building upward for small lots. 8 654
Staff Responses
■The County surveyed the Saranap
neighborhood and identified many
houses within 1,000 feet that are two-
stories or have two-story elements.
■County Code Section 26-2.2004,
requires that a Notice be mailed at least
10 days prior to the hearing. County Staff
has a signed affidavit dated September
19, 2023, which declares that the
County mailed the notices 12 calendar
days before.
■County does not require applicants to
engage with neighbors and the County
does not require a property owner to
build upwards or outwards.
Analysis not done in “neighborhood”
Failure to provide proper notice
Public Comment Lettes dated 10/2/2023 and 1/22/2024
9 655
Photos of Surrounding Compatible Homes
10
25 Hilton Court
(617 FT North)
3522 Freeman Road
(621 FT North)
3448 Freeman Road
57 FT North)
835 Juanita Drive
(957 FT North)
3559 Melody Drive
(750 FT East)
144 Ponderosa Lane
(766 FT north)
3338 Freeman Road
(1,240 FT east)
41 Manzanita Ct
(1,105 FT north east)
756 Hilton Road
(923 FT north west)
656
11 657
Staff Conclusion
■The project is consistent with the applicable policies/standards of:
–County General Plan
–Zoning Consistency
–Small Lot Design Review Findings
■The project is a residential addition and promotes residential development
growth that is consistent with the Saranap neighborhood.
12
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the County Board of Supervisors:
DENY the appeal by Lindsey and Logan Daniels, et al,
APPROVE the project based on the findings and conditions of approval
658
QUESTIONS?
13 659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
Kathy Marsh, Children & Family Services Director
Proclamation by Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
WHEREAS, Kathy Marsh, Director of Children & Family Services (CFS) at Contra Costa County’s
Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD), is retiring in March 2024 from her life’s work
of supporting and advocating for the most vulnerable in our community; and
WHEREAS, during her 30 years dedicated to protecting, serving, and supporting children, youth, and
families in Contra Costa County, Kathy was instrumental in developing Children & Family Services
programs; and
WHEREAS, Kathy began her child welfare career as a temp social worker in the Screening/Child
Protective Services hotline unit, moved on to staff positions in Continuing Services, Licensing, and
Adoptions, and later promoted to analyst, supervisor, and division manager roles for Home Finding,
Placements, and the Independent Living Services Program; and
WHEREAS, after 22 years, Kathy became the Children and Family Services Bureau Director leading
Contra Costa County’s exceptional child welfare program, served on the EHSD Executive Team, and
stepped in as Interim EHSD Director in 2022 during a transition in leadership; and
WHEREAS, Kathy has inspired her colleagues at EHSD and throughout the County, providing
encouragement, support, and resources for them to achieve their goals; and
WHEREAS, Kathy helped transform Contra Costa County’s child welfare system from mandated
reporting to community supporting through her leadership and collaboration with the CFS team, EHSD
community partners, County leaders, our courts, and state agencies; and
WHEREAS, throughout Kathy’s staff and leadership roles, Children & Family Services decreased the
number of children and youth in out-of-home care from 2,245 in October 1998 to 529 in October 2023;
decreased the rate of children in care from 8.7 per 1000 in July 2000 to 2.3 per 1000 in July 2023; and
decreased the rate of recurrence of maltreatment within 24 months from 14.6% in October 1999 to
11.0% in November 2023.
WHEREAS in 2023-2024, Kathy and the CFS team collaborated with several County and community
partners to develop our Families First Prevention Service Act (FFPSA) Plan which will continue and
expand our collective focus on family supporting prevention services; and
WHEREAS, Kathy leaves a legacy of integrity, compassion, and dedication to ensuring our
community members have access to resources that support, protect, and empower them to achieve self-
sufficiency; and
WHEREAS, Kathy’s many contributions during her time at EHSD include her wealth of knowledge,
thoughtful leadership, kind demeanor, and genuine commitment to the people she has served.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Kathy Marsh is recognized for her 30 years of
dedicated service to Contra Costa County, with immense gratitude for her valuable contributions
throughout her career.
724
725
726
727
Crowe LLP
Independent Member Crowe International
575 Market Street, Suite 3300
San Francisco, California 94105-5829
Tel 415.576.1100
Fax 415.576.1110
www.crowe.com
March 11, 2024
Ms. Deidra Dingman
Conservation Programs Manager
Contra Costa County
Department of Conservation and Community Development
30 Muir Road
Martinez, California 94553-4601
Subject: Final Report – Analysis of Senate Bill 1383 Rate Request Submitted by
Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
Dear Ms. Dingman:
This report provides results of Crowe LLP’s (Crowe) analysis of a rate application (Application) submitted
by Garaventa Enterprises (dba Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery – Contra Costa County (“MDRR”)) to
Contra Costa County (County) to cover new costs required to comply with Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383).
Garaventa provides refuse, organics, and recycling collection services to unincorporated Contra Costa
County. This letter report is organized into eight (8) sections as follows:
A. Purpose of Analysis
B. Summary Results of Analysis
C. Background of Analysis
D. Goals and Objectives of Analysis
E. Scope of Analysis
F. History of Collection Rates
G. SB 1383 Rate Application
H. Results of Analysis.
There are four (4) attachments to this report, as follows:
A. SB 1383 Rate Application
B. Initial SB 1383 Rate Application (2022)
C. Adjusted SB 1383 Rate Model
D. Summary Comparison of Other Jurisdictions’ SB 1383 Rate Changes.
A. Purpose of Analysis
The purpose of this analysis of the SB 1383 rate request submitted by MDRR (Analysis) is to assist the
County with establishing rates for refuse and recycling collection to cover new costs required to comply
with SB 1383 requirements. Effective January 1, 2022, SB 1383 requires all businesses and residents to
separate organics and recyclable materials from trash and either subscribe to the required collection
services or self-haul organics to an appropriate facility for diversion. Under SB 1383, organic waste
haulers will need to monitor contamination of organic waste containers at the time of collection, and report
contamination data to jurisdictions.
This Analysis was conducted in accordance with the County’s Rate Setting Process and Methodology
Manual Solid Waste Collection Charges (Manual), dated July 15, 2011. The information in this Analysis is
based on estimates, assumptions and other data developed from information provided by MDRR,
728
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 2
March 11, 2024
knowledge of and participation in other studies, data supplied by the County, and other sources deemed
to be reliable.
B. Summary
In its Application, MDRR requested a rate increase of 22.05 percent. Based on the analysis of the
Application, and applying the methodology contained in the Manual, we calculated a combined SB 1383
rate increase of 15.02 percent for 2024.
Table 1 below shows the rate increase for typical residential customer service levels. For residential
customers, this rate increase corresponds to an increase of between $5.14 and $8.86 per customer, per
month, depending on the residential service level. Table 2 shows the calculated rate increase for typical
commercial customers, depending on the commercial service level.
Table 1
Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
2024 Residential Rates, by Service Level
(Per Customer, Per Month)
Service Level 2023 Rate 1
SB 1383 Rate
Increase
(15.02%)
2024 Rate
20 Gallon $34.25 $5.14 $39.39
32 Gallon $42.72 $6.42 49.14
64 Gallon $49.56 $7.44 57.00
96 Gallon $58.96 $8.86 67.82
Table 2
Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
2024 Commercial Rates, by Selected Service Level
(Per Customer, Per Month)
Service Level 2023 Rate1
SB 1383 Rate
Increase
(15.02%)
2024 Rate
96 Gallon Cart $87.70 $13.17 $100.87
2 Yd Bin 1 x per week 388.22 58.31 446.53
3 Yd Bin 1 x per week 542.25 81.45 623.70
6 Yd Bin 1 x per week 1,006.07 151.11 1,157.18
1 Effective September 1, 2023.
729
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 3
March 11, 2024
C. Background of Analysis
On October 12, 2023, MDRR submitted a rate request to the County to cover new costs associated with
SB 1383 compliance related activities. MDRR’s 2024 projected SB 1383 compliance costs primarily
include:
• Capital costs for SB 1383 requirements – container labels, customer outreach, and regulatory
compliance
• An increase of three (3) additional residential drivers and trucks which is needed to shift from bi-
weekly to weekly organics collection
• Tipping fee increase at the CCWS/RCTS facility of $17.11 per ton for facility 1) recycling operations at
MDR, 2) SB 1383 post collection processing costs, and 3) costs of new related buildings and
infrastructure.2
MDRR operates under an exclusive franchise with the County to collect, and remove for disposal and
recycling, residential, commercial, and light industrial solid waste, recyclable materials, and green waste
(organics). On May 9, 1995, the County signed a twenty (20) year franchise agreement with MDRR. On
August 9, 2011, the County approved the Third Amendment to the Franchise Agreement which extended
the franchise term an additional ten (10) years through May 8, 2025 or until termination of the 3-cart
system, whichever is shortest.
The MDRR franchise includes the following six (6) service areas in unincorporated Contra Costa County
(Exhibit 1 shows the location of each service area):
1. Bay Point
2. Brentwood, unincorporated
3. Byron
4. Discovery Bay
5. Bethel Island, Knightsen & Oakley, unincorporated
6. North Concord, unincorporated.
MDRR consolidates refuse collected from unincorporated County areas at the Recycling Center and
Transfer Station (RCTS) in Pittsburg, California. MDRR then transports the refuse to Keller Canyon
Landfill (located in unincorporated Contra Costa County) for disposal. MDRR provides curbside recycling
services to unincorporated County areas.
Residential customers commingle their recyclable materials into one 96-gallon cart. MDRR collects
residential curbside recyclables bi-weekly.3 MDRR takes recyclable materials to its RCTS facility where
they are separated on a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) sort line. MDRR also provides residential
customers with bi-weekly green waste collection service.
2 Represents a $16.25 per ton increase in 2021 escalated by 1.59% in 2022 and 3.66% in 2023.
3 With the exception of customers located on Marsh Creek Road who currently place their recyclables out for weekly collection in
special company issued blue bags.
730
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 4
March 11, 2024
Exhibit 1
Unincorporated Contra Costa County
Map of Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery Service Areas
D. Goals and Objectives of Analysis
The primary goal of this Analysis is to determine fair and equitable residential and commercial refuse
charges that cover MDRR’s incremental new costs required to comply with SB 1383 requirements.
MDRR’s Application is for an “extraordinary rate adjustment,” which the Manual describes as follows:
“Special extraordinary rate applications are allowed outside of the annual schedules of the
base year, interim year, and CPI adjustments. Both the County and the franchise hauler may
initiate the extraordinary rate adjustment process. For these adjustments, the franchise
hauler will provide necessary information and documentation so the County can make a
judgment as to the reasonableness of such a rate adjustment. An extraordinary rate
adjustment can only be implemented by the franchise hauler if approved by the Board of
Supervisors and the required rate change notice has been provided to customers 30 days in
advance.
This extraordinary adjustment will only be considered in a case where the franchise hauler
can demonstrate that a change in one of the cost line items specified in the Base Year Rate
Change Application will exceed two (2) times the most recent change in the Consumer Price
Index for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose area published by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.”
Fairness is demonstrated through a detailed evaluation of MDRR actual revenues and projected
expenses to comply with SB 1383 requirements. Residential charges also should be justifiable and
731
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 5
March 11, 2024
supportable. Rate setting is prospective. The County sets rates in advance of when actual results occur.
The County sets rates that are intended to cover MDRR’s costs of operations and allow a reasonable
profit. The County uses the operating ratio (OR) method to project the profit level allowed to MDRR. The
actual OR level, or profit, received by MDRR in a base year, and in subsequent interim years, is not
however, guaranteed.
E. Scope of Analysis
The scope of work for this project is based on the Manual’s requirements for an “extraordinary rate
adjustment,” within an interim year rate adjustment period. The scope of this Analysis included the
following three (3) primary tasks:
1. Analyze MDRR’s SB 1383 Rate Request
2. Support County in discussions with MDRR
3. Prepare Draft and Final Reports.
As part of this Analysis, we performed the following activities:
• Determined whether the request and rate model is mathematically correct and complete
• Assessed assumptions regarding incremental changes in routes, trucks, labor, operating costs, carts,
profits, and franchise fees
• Obtained documentation supporting baseline and incremental changes to MDRR’s costs (e.g., route
data, number of drivers/laborers, truck and cart depreciation schedules, inventory reports, and
purchase orders validating cost of new trucks/carts)
• Evaluated changes in tipping fees at the RCTS required to process organics materials and to shift to
including post-collection recyclables processing in the facility tip fee
• Compared incremental SB 1383 implementation costs, provided by MDRR and others, experienced in
similar jurisdictions
• Identified adjustments to the company’s request, as necessary.
F. History of Collection Rates
Over the 24 years since the County implemented the Manual (1998 to 2021), County residential rate
increases (shown in Table 3) averaged approximately 3.19 percent on a compounded basis (including
rate increases for new programs). During this same timeframe the applicable CPI increased by
approximately 2.91 percent on a compounded basis.
732
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 6
March 11, 2024
Table 3
Unincorporated Contra Costa County
Historical Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
Residential Refuse Collection Rate Changes
(1998 to 2023)
Year Percent Change in Rate
1999 None
2000 +7.7 to 8.5% (new green waste program)
2001 None
2002 +7.66% (implemented in 2003)
2003 None
2004 (base) +0.00% residential
+11.79% commercial
2005 +3.89% (interim year)
2006 +2.69% (interim year)
2007 +6.44% percent (interim year)
2008 +6.71% percent (base year)
2009 None
2010 None
2011 (base) 13.88% (base year)
2012 New variable can rate structure (varied from reductions of 8% to increase of
11.5% depending on rate category)
2013 2.06% (interim year)
2014 2.38% (interim year)
2015 2.78% (interim year)
2016 5.93% (base year)
2017 3.48% (interim year)
2018 None
2019 None
2020 4.45% (interim year)
2021 None
2022 3.15%
2023 5.00%
G. SB 1383 Rate Application
The County received MDRR’s SB 1383 Rate Change Application (Application) on October 13, 2023. A
copy of the Application is provided in Attachment A at the end of this report.4 As shown in Table 4 this
4 Note that this application supersedes a prior SB 1383 application submitted in 2021 (provided in Attachment B). Additional time
was needed to fully implement the associated SB 1383 facility and operational changes.
733
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 7
March 11, 2024
request corresponds to a $10.93 per customer, per month, increase in the 64-gallon residential rate, the
most common service level in the County franchise area.
Table 4
Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
Requested 2024 Residential Rates, by Service Level
(Per Customer, Per Month)
Service Level 2023 Rate 2024 Rate Rate Change
20 Gallon $34.25 $41.80 $7.55
32 Gallon $42.72 $52.15 $9.42
64 Gallon $49.56 $60.49 $10.93
96 Gallon $58.96 $71.96 $13.00
H. Results of Analysis
This section provides the analysis of MDRR’s Application. The impact of each adjustment is identified in
terms of a dollar value increase or a decrease for each revenue and cost category shown in the
Application. The adjusted rate model is provided in Attachment C.
Revenue Requirement
The revenue requirement is the amount of revenue that MDRR needs to collect, through rates charged to
customers, to cover the costs of providing the service, plus a reasonable financial return. Increasing the
revenue requirement results in an increase in rates and decreasing the revenue requirement results in a
decrease in rates. The revenue requirement is equal to the sum of the following:
• Total allowable costs
• Allowable operating profits
• Total pass through costs.
MDRR’s requested incremental addition to the County revenue requirement for SB 1383, as submitted in
the Application, was $1,814,294 (see Line 48 of the Application). The analysis of the Application resulted
in an overall decrease of $514,173 to MDRR’s requested revenue requirement resulting in an adjusted 2024
revenue requirement of $1,300,121.
The remainder of this subsection identifies and explains adjustments to MDRR’s 2024 projected revenues
and costs.
Revenues
Residential Revenues (Line 1)
MDRR projected 2024 residential revenues of $5,894,000. These revenues were adjusted from
$5,894,000 to $6,302,987 based on annualizing ten months of actual MDRR provided 2021 residential
revenue data and adjusting for approved rate changes in 2022 and 2023.
• Net Impact: $408,987 increase in 2024 residential revenues.
Commercial and Light Industrial Revenues (Lines 2 and 3)
MDRR projected 2024 commercial and light industrial revenues of $2,335,000. These revenues were
adjusted from $2,335,000 to $2,353,382 based on annualizing ten months of actual MDRR provided 2021
commercial and light industrial revenue data and adjusting for approved rate changes in 2022 and 2023.
• Net Impact: $18,382 increase in 2024 commercial and light industrial revenues.
734
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 8
March 11, 2024
Allowable Costs
Residential and Commercial Drivers (Lines 6 and 7)
MDRR projected an increase to its estimated incremental new driver costs of $517,000, reflective of:
• An additional 3 residential drivers (equivalent to 3.0 FTEs) to support weekly versus bi-weekly
organics hauling services, equal to an increase of $507,000 in salary, payroll taxes, and fringe
benefits
• An additional portion of a commercial driver (equivalent to a 0.06 FTEs) to support weekly versus bi-
weekly organics hauling services, equal to a total of $10,000 in salary, payroll taxes, and fringe
benefits.
Driver labor was adjusted to reflect an incremental residential driver requirement of 2.0 FTEs rather than
the 3.0 FTEs requested, which resulted in a decrease of $84,855. Assumptions related to the incremental
2.0 FTEs needed to move from residential bi-weekly to weekly service are provided in Table 5 below:
Table 5
Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
Residential Organics Collection Changes from Current Bi-weekly to Weekly Service
Area
Current Number of Route
Days (Every Other Week
Service)
Current Work
Days (Every
Other Week
Service)
New Work Days
(Every Week
Service)
Incremental
Change in Work
Days (Every Week
Service)
Incremental
Change in Full
Time Equivalent
Staff
Bay Point 2 Drivers, 2 Days/
Every Other Week
104 Work
Days5
208 Work
Days
104 Work
Days 0.5 FTE
Brentwood 1 Driver, 4 Days/
Every Other Week
104 Work
Days6
208 Work
Days
104 Work
Days 0.5 FTE
Discovery Bay 3 Drivers, 2 Days/
Every Other Week
156 Work
Days7
312 Work
Days
156 Work
Days 1.0 FTE
Total 2.0 FTE
• Net Impact: $84,723 decrease in 2024 direct labor costs.8
Depreciation and Other Operating Costs (Lines 9 to 14)
MDRR projected an incremental increase in 2024 depreciation and other operating costs of $84,000
which reflects:
• Projected annual outreach (cart labels) depreciation of $35,000
• Projected annual flyers and publications of $40,000
• Projected other compliance costs of $9,000.
Net Impact: $397 decrease in 2024 depreciation and other operating costs (minor adjustment due to
rounding).
5 Equals 2 drivers x 2 days per week x 26 weeks per year.
6 Equals 1 driver x 4 days per week x 26 weeks per year.
7 Equals 3 drivers x 2 days per week x 26 weeks per year.
8 Includes a $132 addition to commercial drivers (a minor rounding adjustment).
735
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 9
March 11, 2024
Allowable Operating Profit (Line 26)
MDRR’s projected 2024 allowable operating profit totaled $66,778, which reflects:
• A 90 percent operating ratio, and
• Projected $601,000 in total allowable costs.
In accordance with the Manual, the calculation is based on a 90 percent operating ratio. MDRR’s projected
2024 operating profit was reduced from $66,778 to $57,320 based on the adjustments noted above to
MDRR’s projected 2024 total allowable costs (i.e., from $601,000 to $515,880).
• Net Impact: $9,458 decrease in 2024 allowable operating profit.
Pass Through Costs
Trucking and Equipment Costs
MDRR’s projected incremental 2024 trucking and equipment costs totaled $897,000, which reflects:
• An increase by 3.00 residential trucks totaling $880,000
• An increase by 0.06 commercial trucks totaling $17,000.
MDRR’s assumption regarding the total number of new incremental residential trucks was reduced from
3.0 to 2.0 to align with the driver’s 2.0 FTE allocation to support weekly organics collection services
(shown in Table 5). This change in MDRR’s allocation basis decreased the 2024 projected trucking and
equipment costs from $897,000 to $604,107.
• Net Impact: $292,893 decrease in 2024 trucking and equipment costs.
Tipping Fees
MDRR’s projected incremental new 2024 tipping fees (pass-through) costs totaled $352,000, which
reflects:
• Projected increase in the cost of recycling processing at the Recycling Center & Transfer Station
(RCTS) of $141,0009
• Projected increase in SB 1383 post collection efforts at the RCTS of $92,000
• Projected increase to account for capitalizing the costs of an upgraded SEG mechanics shop at the
RCTS of $16,000
• Projected increase to account for capitalizing the costs of a new organics processing facility (building
and infrastructure) at the RCTS of $103,000.
MDRR’s projection for these item was reduced to correct for an incorrect calculation. The Application
incorrectly included costs for a different jurisdiction (a neighboring city) rather than those for the County-
served areas. Additionally, we adjusted the operating ratio applied to these new tipping fees to 90 percent
from the 85 percent level included by MDRR in the Application. These two adjustments resulted in an
overall decrease of $90,710.
• Net Impact: $90,710 decrease in 2024 tipping fee costs.
Franchise Fees
The County franchise agreement with MDRR specifies that the County can establish an amount equal to
“a percentage of Contractor’s [MDRR’s] Gross Annual Revenues” with the “amount, time and frequency of
9 Note: this represents a change in how the company accounts for processing recycled materials at the MRF. As a consequence,
this new cost item is offset by removing the cost of processing materials at the MRF under the current methodology which was equal
to $246,757 (see Line 32 of the application where this is shown as an offset to the incremental new costs).
736
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 10
March 11, 2024
payment of such fees established by the County.” The franchise fee paid by MDRR to the County is
currently equal to seven (7) percent of gross revenues. Gross revenues include residential, commercial,
and light industrial refuse and recycling revenues. Franchise fees are a pass-through expense, which do
not earn profit. MDRR’s projected incremental 2024 franchise fees were reduced from $144,274 to
$108,281 based on the adjustments to MDRRs projected 2024 costs noted above.
• Net Impact: $35,992 decrease in 2024 franchise fees.
A summary of the results of this Analysis is provided in Table 6.
Table 6
Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery
Requested and Adjusted New 2024 Revenue Requirement and Rate Change
(SB 1383)
Description Application Adjustments Total Adjusted
SB 1383 New Revenue Requirement $1,814,294 -$514,173 $1,300,121
SB 1383 Rate Change 22.05% -7.03% 15.02%
In the course of preparing this Analysis, we have not conducted an audit, review, or compilation of any
financial or supplemental data used in the accompanying Analysis. We have made certain projections
which may vary from actual results because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as
expected and such variances may be material. We have no responsibility to update this Analysis for
events or circumstances occurring after the date above.
Our procedures and work product are intended for the benefit and use of the County. This engagement
was not planned or conducted in contemplation of reliance by any other party or with respect to any
specific transaction and is not intended to benefit or influence any other party. Therefore, items of
possible interest to a third party may not be specifically addressed or matters may exist that could be
assessed differently by a third party.
This Analysis is substantially different from an audit, examination, or review in accordance with Generally
Accepted Auditing Standards, the objective of which is to express an opinion regarding MDRR financial
statements. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Crowe’s services and work product were
performed in accordance with the Standards for Consulting Services established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“AICPA”) and do not constitute an audit, examination, or review
in accordance with standards established by the AICPA.
In the preparation of this Analysis, Crowe relied upon the information provided to Crowe without
verification or investigation. The information in this Analysis is based on estimates, assumptions and
other data developed by Crowe from information provided by MDRR, knowledge of and participation in
other studies, data supplied by the County, and other sources deemed to be reliable.
Crowe worked at the direction of the County in providing our services and preparing this Analysis. The
County determined and approved the scope included within Crowe’s work. The County will review this
report and will determine to accept this Analysis and how to implement the results of Crowe’s services.
The consulting services did not contemplate obtaining the understanding of MDRR internal controls or
assessing control risks, tests of accounting records and responses to inquiries by obtaining corroborating
evidential matter, and certain other procedures ordinarily performed during an audit, examination, or
review. Thus, this engagement was not intended to provide assurance that we would become aware of
significant matters that would be disclosed in an audit, examination, or review.
The County agreed to be responsible to make all management decisions and perform all management
functions; designate an individual who possesses suitable skill, knowledge, and/or experience, preferably
within senior management to oversee these services; evaluated the adequacy and results of the services
performed; and accepted responsibility for the results of the services.
737
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 11
March 11, 2024
Crowe’s fees are not dependent upon the outcome of this report.
As a CPA firm the following statement is required: Crowe LLP is licensed by the
California Board of Accountancy. Note also that Crowe and certain of its owners are
licensed by the California State Board of Accountancy, but we are required by law to
inform you that Crowe has owners not licensed by the California State Board of
Accountancy who may provide services in connection with this engagement.
* * * * *
If you have any questions regarding this Analysis, or any of the contents of this letter report, please do not
hesitate to contact Erik Nylund at (415) 230-4963.
738
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 12
March 11, 2024
Attachment A: SB 1383 Rate Application
739
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 13
March 11, 2024
Attachment A includes the updated 2024 (Application) submitted by MDRR to the County. In the
Application, MDRR proposed to increase unincorporated County collection rates by 22.05 percent in
2024. The Application modified MDRR’s original SB 1383 application submitted in 2022 (shown in
Attachment B).
The changes from the 2022 application to this 2024 Application include:
• Adjusted for the impact of an approved rate increase of 3.15% residential/7.15% commercial in 2022
• Adjusted for the impact of an approved rate increase of 5.00% in 2023
• Removal of pail, lid, and cart depreciation
• Adjusted for CPI based adjustments to applicable allowable and pass through costs in 2022 (5.90%)
and 2023 (2.88%
• Removal of the CPI based increase (Line 50, already granted through rate changes noted above).
740
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 14
March 11, 2024
741
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 15
March 11, 2024
Attachment B: Initial SB 1383 Rate Application (2022)
742
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 16
March 11, 2024
Attachment B includes a 2022 application submitted by MDRR to the County. In this application, MDRR
proposed to increase unincorporated County collection rates by 26.88 percent in 2024. MDRR used year-
to-date information to estimate 2021 financial results. Year 2022 results were entirely projected in the
Application. MDRR requested a 26.88 percent rate increase effective for 2022, inclusive of a 23.07
percent increase for SB 1383 requirements and a 3.81 percent CPI increase. The Application cited the
following primary drivers for the rate increase request:
• Capital costs for SB 1383 requirements – kitchen pails, replacement of commercial bin lids, new
carts, container labels, customer outreach, and regulatory compliance - $910,598 ($178,133 annual
costs)
• An increase of three (3) additional residential drivers and trucks which is needed to shift from bi-
weekly to weekly organics collection
• Tipping fee increase at the CCWS/RCTS facility of $16.25 per ton to cover the following facility
changes: 1) changes to recycling operations at MDRR, 2) SB 1383 post collection processing costs,
and 3) new related buildings and infrastructure.
743
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 17
March 11, 2024
744
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 18
March 11, 2024
745
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 19
March 11, 2024
746
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 20
March 11, 2024
747
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 21
March 11, 2024
748
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 22
March 11, 2024
Attachment C: Adjusted SB1383 Rate Model
749
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 23
March 11, 2024
Line
Total MDRR
Application
Total
Adjustments Total Adusted
Residential Service 1 5,894,000$ 408,987$ 6,302,987$
Commercial Service 2 1,631,000 150,140 1,781,140
Debris Box 3 704,000 (131,758) 572,242
Total Commercial Revenue 4 2,335,000$ 18,382$ 2,353,382$
Total Revenue 5 8,229,000$ 427,369$ 8,656,369$
Additional Residential Drivers 6 507,000$ (84,855)$ 422,145$
Additional Commercial Drivers 7 10,000 132 10,132
Additional Drivers 8 517,000 (84,723) 432,277
Pail Depreciation 9 -$ -$ -$
Lid Depreciation 10 - - -
Cart Deprecation 11 - - -
Total Outreach - Label Depreciation 12 35,000 (297) 34,703
Total Outreach - Flyers & Publications 13 40,000 (224) 39,776
Total Compliance Costs 14 9,000 124 9,124
Total Other 1383 Costs 15 84,000$ (397)$ 83,603$
Total Allowable Costs 16 601,000$ (85,120)$ 515,880$
Operating Profit 17 66,778 (9,458) 57,320
Operating Ratio %18 90.0%0.0%90.0%
Total Allowable Costs + Profit 19 667,778$ (94,578)$ 573,200$
Additional Residential Truck(s)20 880,000$ (293,083)$ 586,917$
Additional Commercial Truck(s)21 17,000 190 17,190
Total Trucks 22 897,000$ (292,893)$ 604,107$
Cost of Recycling 23 141,000$ (38,226)$ 102,774$
1383 Post Collection 24 92,000 (23,484) 68,516
SEG - Mechanic Shop @ RCTS 25 16,000 (3,000) 13,000
Phase 2 - Organics Building & Infrastructure 26 103,000 (26,000) 77,000
Total Tip Fee Increase 27 352,000$ (90,710)$ 261,290$
-$
Total Pass Through Costs 28 1,249,000$ (383,603)$ 865,397$
-
Total Costs + Profit 29 1,916,778$ (478,181)$ 1,438,597$
-$
Contra Costa County Franchise Fee @ 7%30 144,274$ (35,992)$ 108,281$
-$ -$ -$
Total Costs + Profits + Franchse Fees 31 2,061,051$ (514,173)$ 1,546,878$
-$
Minus 2019 Base Rate - Recycling Calculations 32 (246,757) - (246,757)
-$
Total Additional Revenue 33 1,814,294$ (514,173)$ 1,300,121$
Total Revenue Based on CPI 34 -$ -$ -$
Total Addiitonal Revenue Requirement with CPI 35 1,814,294$ (514,173)$ 1,300,121$
Commercial & Residential Increase before CPI Adj 36 22.05%-7.03%15.02%
2021 CPI Increase 37 0.00%0.00%0.00%
38 0.00%0.00%0.00%
Total Residential & Commercial Increase
(Scenario 1)39 22.05%-7.03%15.02% Rate Increases 2021 RevenueAllowable CostsPass-Through CostsOther Adjustments750
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 24
March 11, 2024
Attachment D: Summary Comparison of Other Jurisdictions’ SB 1383 Rate
Changes
751
Ms. Deidra Dingman Page 25
March 11, 2024
Crowe did some research on the rate impacts of implementing SB 1383 in jurisdictions throughout
California. The general expectation was for households to see a rate increase of between $3 and $5 per
customer, per month with the average increase for businesses of between $70 and $90 per month. The
League of California Cities reported a potential range of between 1 and 20 percent. The large range in
rate changes is primarily driven by whether facility changes are required and to what degree collection
routing/operations change.
A total of nineteen (19) recent published examples of SB 1383 rate changes throughout California are
listed below10:
• City of Beaumont – 15.4%
• City of Campbell – 9.9%
• City of Claremont – 6.5%
• City of Citrus Heights – 26%
• City of Elk Grove – 23%
• City of Encinitas - $3.88 per residential customer, per month
• City of Folsom – 34.1%
• City of Industry - $2.45 per residential customer, per month
• City of Lake Forest – 25%
• City of Los Gatos – 9.9%
• City of Monte Sereno – 9.3%
• City of Napa – 6%
• City of Pacifica – 5.5%
• City of Rolling Hills Estates – 6.3%
• City of Santa Clara – 16%
• City of Saratoga – 9.5%
• City of Sacramento – 27% (implementation spread over 3 years)
• City of Vacaville – 4.2%
• City of Walnut – 9.36%.
For the 17 jurisdictions with a percent change noted above, these rate changes ranged from 4.2 to 34.1
percent with an average of just over 14 percent.
10 These rate changes represent almost entirely the impacts of SB 1383, with some minor portions of these rate changes associated
with other changes unrelated to SB 1383.
752
753