Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 02132007 - D.3
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP Costa COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR .r :E County C'OUN DATE: FEBRUARY 13, 2007 SUBJECT:, HEARING ON COMBINED APPLICATIONS FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN RELATED TO THE NOVE PROPERTY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, LOCATED AT 500 PITTSBURG AVENUE, NORTH RICHMOND AREA, SIGNATURE PROPERTIES (APPLICANT), NOVE INVESTMENTS (OWNER) (COUNTY FILES: GP#04-0008 AND DP#05-3024) (DISTRICT I) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S)'& BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION L RECOMMENDATIONS A. OPEN the public hearing and take testimony on the project. B. CLOSE the public hearing. C. FIND the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#2006102106) prepared for this project to be adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the accompanying Mitigation Monitoring Program. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: "X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD, COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON �, Z? ,'2OT�' APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER V57OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND lG UNANIMOUS (ABSENT. ) CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED AYES: NOES: ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON THE DATE SHOWN Contact: P. Roche,CCD-Adv. Pin.(925)335-1242 ATTESTED Orig: Community Development Department JOHN CULLEN, CLER F THE BOARD OF cc: Nove Investments(Owner) SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Signature Properties(Applicant) County Administrator's Office Clerk of the Board County Counsel BY EPUTY Public Works Department North Richmond MAC File February 13,2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05-3024) Page 2 D. ACCEPT the recommendation of the County Planning Commission, as contained in its Resolution No. 5-2007, which is attached as Exhibit#2. E. ADOPT the General Plan Amendment (County File'. GP#04-0008), including the change to the Land Use Element Map re-designating the Nove Property from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple Family Residential-Medium Density (MM), as recommended in County Planning Commission Resolution No. 4-2007,-and as illustrated on the map listed as Exhibit 6A, as the first Consolidated General Plan Amendment for Calendar Year 2007. F. APPROVE the Preliminary and Final Development Plan (County File: DP#05-3024), with Conditions of Approval as described in County Planning Commission Resolution No. 5-2007 and with staff recommendations -pertaining to certain Conditions of Approval, including the requirement for a strengthened disclosure statement under Condition of Approval #13 — Noise and evaluation of whether a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) is appropriate for the subject site under Condition of Approval #18-Geological Conditions. G. ADOPT the findings as described in.proposed Board Resolution No. 2007/44 as the basis for the Board's action, which is attached as Exhibit 1. H. DIRECT the Community Development Department to post the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. II. FISCAL IMPACT None. The'applicant is responsible for application processing costs. III. PROPOSED PROJECT The Applicant (Signature Properties) requests approval by the Board of Supervisors of two related applications associated with-a.370 unit residential development project on the Nove Property located at 500 Pittsburg Avenue in the North Richmond: A. General Plan Amendment (County File: GP#04-0008) An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020) re- designating two parcels (APN: 408-170-072 and 408-180-010) totaling 29.2 acres from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM). A map illustrating the re-designation of the Nove Property to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM) is listed as Exhibit 6A. B. Preliminary and Final Development Plan (County File: DP#05-3024) Approval of a Preliminary and Final Development Plan to construct 370 residential units on the Nove Property. The total 370 units are divided into three housing types: 2-story townhouses— .120 units; 2- story clustered homes — 110 units; and, 1 and 2-story condominiums — 140 units. A related subdivision map (County File: SD#05-8938) was approved as a vesting tentative map under County Planning Commission Resolution No. 5-2007 contingent upon the Board's approval of the General Plan Amendment and Preliminary and Final Development Plan. It establishes 370 residential lots that range in size from 2,080 square feet minimum to 4,930 square feet maximum. February 13,2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05-3024) Page 3 III. PROPOSED PROJECT- continued f The Development Plan requires 15% of the total units to be affordable, and permits delivery of the affordable units on-site or off-site (but within the North Richmond area). The Development 'Plan includes a parking plan that provides for two parking spaces per unit and includes on-site guest parking spaces. The Development Plan also sets aside 6.7 acres of park/open space area. The Development Plan would result in an overall net residential density of 14 units to the acre, which is consistent with the recommended General Plan Amendment to re-designate the site to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM). The Preliminary and Final Development Plan recommended for Board approval is listed as Exhibit# 6B. IV. BACKGROUND/ REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION A. Site Description and Setting The Nove Property is located in the unincorporated area of North Richmond bounded by the Richmond Parkway on the west, Pittsburg Avenue on the north, and Wildcat Creek on the south. The subject site consists of 29.2 acres comprised of Assessor Parcel Numbers 408-170-072 and 408-180-010. The Nove Property has been used for many years as part of a flower growing and staging operation by Color Spot, Inc. The property has been leased by Color Spot, Inc. from Nove Investments. It is presently occupied by a combination of greenhouses and flower growing areas that contain plastic plant flats. The greenhouse areas are laid out in rectangular plots, with relatively wide, gravel covered roads between them. Several one-story, wood-framed buildings are located near the center of the property. Topographically the property is a relatively flat area with a slight, though gentle slope from east to west. It contains clayey native soils and has a high groundwater table. Existing drainage on the property is over land and drains to an existing ditch along the westerly boundary that discharges to an existing 48 inch storm drain in Pittsburg Avenue, which itself drains in a westerly direction crossing Richmond Parkway. Land uses of various properties near the Nove Property consist of an East Bay Municipal Utility District Water Reclamation Facility, various recycling and auto dismantling operations, floricultural growing and distribution operations, and the West County Waste Authority Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. B. General Plan Amendment The General Plan Amendment (County File: GP#04-0008) would convert the 29.2-acre Nove Property from industrial use to residential use. The County Planning Commission is recommending the Board adopt the General Plan Amendment (see County Planning Commission Resolution No. 5- 2007, listed under Exhibit#2, and as depicted in the map listed under Exhibit #6A). As more fully described in the Staff Report and Recommendations to County Planning Commission (see Exhibit #5), the proposal was evaluated under the following considerations: Impact on Demand for Industrial Land . 1 1 February 13, 2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05-3024) Page 4 IV. BACKGROUND / REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - continued • Appropriateness of Introducing Residential Use In Predominantly Industrial Area and Potential Environmental Effects Potential to Advance Goals and Policies of the General Plan and North Richmond Redevelopment Plan The report to the Commission included an analysis prepared by a real estate economist for the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency that evaluated the current and future demand for industrial space in North Richmond. A key finding from this analysis was that most of the industrial land of North Richmond was either underutilized or vacant, and that the type of industrial development that has occurred in recent years was not generating high levels of employment. The analysis also determined that over the next 25 years.the North Richmond industrial area would likely see a smaller proportion of industrial development and that based on projected demand there is an oversupply of land area reserved for industrial development. The report's findings provide substantial evidence that the conversion of 29 acres of industrial land to residential use, as proposed by Signature Properties, would not have negative consequences on the supply of land needed for projected industrial development. There is at present more than adequate land ready and available in North Richmond to meet current and future demand for industrial space. Another important land use consideration that this proposal raises is whether the change to residential use would create an incompatibility or conflict with nearby, existing industrial uses. The Nove Property is bounded on two sides by active industrial uses: to the east is the West County Integrated Resource Recovery Center, a solid waste transfer and recycling facility; and to the north along Pittsburg Avenue are various industrial uses primarily engaged in recycling metal products and drums. Would the conversion of the Nove property to residential use inevitably result in a conflict with these ongoing industrial operations? In communities where proposals to convert or recycle underutilized industrial land to residential use have been considered, the focus has been on the environmental effects from nearby, existing industrial operations on new residential development. The environmental effects from the industrial uses, namely smoke, odors, noise, vibration, glare, and traffic, on the proposed residential development for the. Nove Property were considered and controlled through site layout and design of the new residential units. As more fully described in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the accompanying mitigation program; and as depicted in the site plan, the layout and design for the residential units on the Nove Property would control for the effects of the nearest industrial properties by creating a separation and buffer from the noise, emissions, and odors of the nearest industrial uses. It is noted that the combination ofreduced demand for industrial space in North Richmond; the nature and extent of the nearest existing industrial uses, and the overall improvements in air pollution/noise control technologies, have made it more feasible to consider the appropriateness of converting or recycling some of the underutilized or industrial land in North Richmond to residential . use. The County Planning Commission concluded that the Nove Property is an appropriate location to consider for conversion from industrial use to residential use. In addition to these considerations, the County Planning Commission evaluated the residential development proposal for the Nove Property against its ability to advance the goals and policies of both the General Plan and North Richmond Redevelopment Plan. As described in the staff report to the Commission, the Nove Property supports or advances policies in the Land Use Element that encourage infill residential development. The site is an underutilized industrial property within an urbanized area already served by public services and utilities that have capacity to serve new residential development. February 13,2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05=3024) Page 5 IV. BACKGROUND/ REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - continued The proposal would clearly advance goals of both the General Plan and Redevelopment Plan to increase the quantity and quality of housing in the North Richmond area. The project would not only build market rate housing aimed at the typical entry-level homebuyer in West County, but also meets the requirement to provide that 15% of the units will be affordable as mandated under California Redevelopment Law. The proposal would also advance General Plan policies related to the provision of park and recreation facilities because the Applicant has voluntarily agreed to pay a much higher park fee. They have agreed to pay a park dedication (Quimby Act) fee of $2,000.00 per unit and an additional park enhancement fee of $5,235.00 per unit. This equates to a total payment of $2,676,950 in park fees from this one project. These park fees would provide an important public benefit by making a substantial funding contribution toward the overall improvement to park and recreational facilities and programs in North Richmond. C. Preliminary and Final Development Plan The Applicant is proposing to subdivide the 29.2-acre Nove property into 370 residential units, three designated park sites, several open space areas, and provide an internal private road system. The 370 residential units consist of three different housing types, which are divided into townhomes (140 units — ranging in size from 1353 to 2052 square feet, consisting of 2 bedroom, 2 bath and 3 bedroom, 2 bath units), condominiums ( 120 units — ranging in sizes of 1044 to 1422.square feet, consisting of 2 bedroom, 2 bath and 3 bedroom, 2 bath units) and cluster or court homes (110 units —' ranging in size from 1354 to 2176 square feet, with floor plans consisting of 3 bedroom, 2 bath to 4 bedroom, 2 bath with family rooms and formal dining). The architectural style of the residential development would have "Craftsman" design elements. Approximately 6.7 acres of the site would be reserved for park/open space uses featuring a central park, and park/open space adjoining.-Wildcat•Creek to be connected by a meandering trail. The park/open space area is to be owned and maintained by a Homeowners Association. There would be two points of access, both from Pittsburg Avenue, which then creates a central loop through the development. The internal road system would be built to meet County standards for private roadways, as well as meeting the requirements of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. Each residential unit would have two off-street parking spaces, 740 total spaces,.and guest parking spaces would be provided on-site. The County Planning Commission has reviewed the Preliminary and Final Development Plan and recommends the Board approve the Preliminary and Final Development Plan (see Exhibit #6B) along with the Conditions of Approval (see Exhibit #3). D. County Planning Commission Hearing, January 9, 2007 The County Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed project on January 9, 2007. After evaluating the project in its entirety, including all public testimony and evidence in the record, the Commission unanimously voted to approve the subdivision portion of the project and to recommend the Board approval of the General Plan Amendment and the Preliminary and Final Development Plan. February 13, 2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05-3024) Page 6 IV. BACKGROUND/ REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - continued The County Planning Commission's January 9, 2007 action included modifications to the following Conditions of Approval (COA) to the Subdivision Map and Development Plan: Noise - COA#13— Strengthen Disclosure Statement The Commission added a stipulation to COA#13 which requires that a disclosure statement about noise and odor for future residents be prepared by the Applicant in consultation with nearby landowners. The disclosure statement is intended to be submitted to the Zoning Administrator prior to review of the.project by the Board of Supervisors. The added stipulation to COA#13 reads as follows: "In consultation with any interested neighbors, the applicant shall submit an appropriately strengthened disclosure statement, and/or changes to the plan, to the Zoning Administrator addressing the odor and noise issues raised during this public hearing (County Planning Commission meeting on January 9, 2007). The Zoning Administrator shall review and recommend an appropriate disclosure statement to the Board of Supervisors during their review of the County Planning Commission's action". The Applicant has complied with this additional requirement under COA#13; as they have submitted to the Zoning Administrator a strengthened disclosure statement following consultation with IMACC, the operator of a nearby facility that reconditions industrial drums. A copy of the disclosure statement as agreed to by both parties is included under Exhibit #7A. The disclosure statement informs future homebuyers within the subdivision on the Nove Property of the IMACC facility and explains potential impacts this industrial operation may have on the residences within the subdivision. The Zoning Administrator finds that the strengthened disclosure statement addresses the concerns raised by the County Planning Commission. Consequently, it is recommended that the Board strike that portion of COA#13, as modified by the County Planning Commission on January 9, 2007, and replace it with a new sentence that reads as follows: "Prior to Final Map record the document entitled "Disclosure Statement Regarding Adjacent IMACC Facility"; as agreed to by Signature Properties and representatives of IMACC, to inform future homebuyers about the nature and extent of industrial-related operations within the IMACC-facility, which is located on Pittsburg Avenue directly across from the Nove Property." Geological Conditions—COA#18—add Td bullet point relating to Geoloqic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) Several Commissioners questioned why a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) was not established for the residential development on the Nove Property. Due to this concern, the Commission added a third bullet to COA#18 as follows: • "The project shall be subject to a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD). Before the issuance.of any building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department all necessary documentation for review by the County Planning Commission to recommend to the Board of Supervisors, the formation of a GHAD, including a Plan of February 13,2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05-3024) Page 7 IV. BACKGROUND/ REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - continued Control, and the implementation of an assessment on all properties within the GHAD boundaries to support the activities of the GHAD as identified by the Plan of Control." .The Department believes that the Applicant has substantially complied with this additional requirement to review whether formation of a GHAD is necessary.. Attached for the Board's consideration under Exhibit # 7B is a letter from Donald Brueggers, ENGEO, who is the Applicant's Geotechnical Engineer. The letter responds to questions raised at the January 9, 2007 County Planning .Commission hearing about the necessity to create a GHAD for the Nove Property. As explained in the ENGEO letter the formation of a GHAD to provide post-construction maintenance functions is unnecessary because the known geologic hazards on the property evaluated in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration would be mitigated during site grading through soil compaction and placement of surcharge fill. The. geotechnical report prepared by ENGEO for this property and incorporated into the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration discussed the presence of discontinuous zones or pockets of loose sand that may liquefy or densify during an earthquake and the ENGEO report evaluated the potential for settlement of soft compressible soils. The Applicant's geotechnical expert (ENGEO), the County's consulting geologist, and the County Public Works Department are all in concurrence that formation of a GHAD is not necessary for this property since_ the site grading (including the combination of soil compaction and placement of surcharge fill) will mitigate the geologic impacts identified for development of this site. The Department recommends acceptance of the 1/19/2007 letter from ENGEO in substantial compliance with the additional requirement under Geological Conditions - COA#18, as requested by the County Planning Commission, to review the appropriateness of forming a GHAD for this project. In accepting this review and its conclusion that a GHAD is unnecessary for the Nove Property, the Department further recommends the Board strike the requirement pertaining to the formation of a GHAD from COA#18. . Upon review of the audio tape for the 1/9/2007 County Planning Commission hearing, the express intent of the Commissioner who made the motion adding this item to COA#18 was a request that the Department review the appropriateness of establishing a GHAD prior to the Board hearing on the project, and, as appropriate, based on this review recommend to the Board whether to require a GHAD for this project. February 13,2007 Board of Supervisors Nove Property Residential Project(County Files: GP#04-0008 and DP#05-3024) Page 8 EXHIBITS NOVE PROPERTY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT (COUNTY FILES: GP#04-0008 AND DP#05-3024) 1. Proposed Board Resolution No. 2007/44 2. County Planning Commission Resolution No. 5-2007 3. Conditions. of Approval With Staff Recommended Modification to COA#13 - Noise, re: Disclosure Statement and COA#18 — Geological Conditions re: GHAD Formation 4. January 9, 2007 Staff Report and Recommendation to County Planning Commission (including the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH#2006102106, prepared for the Nove Property Residential Project in accordance with CEQA) 5. Hearing Notification and Mailing List 6. Maps and Plans A. Map of Recommended General Plan Land Use Designation, Nove Property, Per CPC Res. No. 5-2007 (County File: GP#04-0008) B. Preliminary .and Final Development Plan (County File: DP#05-3024), dated 9/7/2006 7. Items Submitted In Response To Modified COAs Following CPC Hearing, 1/9/2007 A. "Disclosure Statement Re-garding Adiacent IMA CC Facility' B. 1/19/2007 Letter from Donald Brueggers, ENGEO, re: GHAD for Nove Property WAdvance Planning\adv-plan\General Plan Amendments\gp04-0008NovePropGPA\novepropertybo02-13-07.doc EXHIBIT 1 f Proposed Board resolution No. 2007/44 x THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA Adopted this Order on Tuesday, February 13, 2007, by the following vote: i n AYES: VLa , NOES: �Lrr - ABSENT: Jd c cs-c,cJ ABSTAIN: I lwy-0-- RESOLUTION NO. 2007/44 SUBJECT: NOVE PROPERTY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ) APPLICATIONS FOR A GENERAL PLAN ) AMENDMENT (COUNTY FILE: GP#04-0008) AND ) A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ) (COUNTY FILE: DP#05-3024) ) NORTH RICHMOND AREA, DISTRICT I ) WHEREAS, Signature Properties (Applicant) and Nove Investments (Owner) proposed a residential development of 370 units on 29.2+ acres in the unincorporated North. Richmond area of Contra Costa County comprised of two parcels with Assessor's Parcel Numbers 408-180-010 and 408-170-072 (together, the. "Subject Property") for which an application was received by the Community Development Department on March 31, 2005. WHEREAS, the Project includes an application for an amendment to the Land Use Element of' the County General Plan (2005-2020) to re-designate the Subject Property, more generally known as Nove Property, from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density in support of the 370-unit residential development (County File: GP#04-0008). WHEREAS, the Project includes an application for a Preliminary and Final Development Plan to construct a residential development on the Subject Property that would create 370 units: 120 — 2 story townhomes; 110 — 2 story cluster homes, and 140 condominiums (both 1 and 2 stories); and, 15% of the total 370 units, or 57 units, would be set aside as affordable units. The Project also proposes to reserve a total of 6.7 +- acres of open space/park area within the Subject Property; and, all parking for the Project would be provided on-site. (County File:. DP# 05-3024). WHEREAS, as a result of consultation between the Applicant, County staff, and other parties, the Applicant had subsequently modified their original proposal, as described in their applications for General Plan Amendment, Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Map which were submitted on March 31, 2005, to address concerns about the Project and submitted a revised site plan and vesting tentative map, dated September 7, 2006, with the result that the Project revised the layout and reduced the number of lots from 374 to 370 lots amongst other changes. WHEREAS, before approving the General Plan Amendment and Final Development Plan, the Board of Supervisors shall certify the mitigated negative declaration covering the development authorized by the approvals for the project (the "Mitigated Negative Declaration") and adopted related finding.. WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines, a report dated October 18, 2006 and entitled Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Nove Property. (the "Initial Study") was prepared to determine whether an environmental impact report should be prepared for the Project. WHEREAS, the Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, utilities and service systems, hydrology and water quality, noise, air quality, geology and soils, public services, transportation traffic and utilities and services, the Initial Study recommended mitigation measures which would reduce each identified impact to a less than significant level. WHEREAS, on October 23, 2006 the County published a Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, which Notice recited the foregoing facts, indicated that the Applicant had agreed to accept each mitigation measure recommended by the Initial Study, started a period for public comments on adequacy of the environmental documents related to the Project that ran initially to November 21, 2006. WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the County Regional Planning Commission on Tuesday, January 9, 2007, during which the Commission fully reviewed, considered, and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter and forwarded a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to approve the Project as contained in its Resolution No. 5- 2007. WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, February 13, 2007, whereat all persons interested therein might appear and be heard. Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors ("this Board") takes the following actions: 1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.), and the County's own CEQA Guidelines (together,. "CEQA"), this Board FINDS that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") is adequate for the purposes of compliance with CEQA and ADOPTS the MND for the Project. In support of these actions and conclusions, this Board ADOPTS the CEQA Findings. This Board adopts these findings specifically for each of the Approvals and Entitlements it approves for the Project. This Board CERTIFIES that it has been presented with the Initial Study and that it has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study and the other information in the record prior to making the following certifications and findings. This Board further CERTIFIES that the Initial Study reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis, and that the Initial Study has been completed in compliance with the CEQA Regulations. 2. ADOPTS the proposed General Plan Amendment (County File: GP#04-0008) changing the General Plan land use designations on the Land Use Element Map for the Subject Property from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM); this Board ADOPTS the findings contained herein supporting this action; and, INCLUDES this General Plan Amendment adoption as the 1st Consolidated General Plan Amendment of 2007 as permitted by State law. 3. APPROVES the proposed the Preliminary and Final Development Plan for the Project (County File: DP#05-3024) subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by the County Planning Commission, with the modifications to Conditions of Approval #13 #18 as recommended by staff, and subject to the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Project and the Board ADOPTS the findings contained herein supporting this action BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for the Board actions are as follows: FINDINGS I. Growth Management Performance Standards A. Traffic: The Project will generate an estimated 370 additional AM and PM peak hour trips. Because the project would generate more than 100 peak period trips, the applicant was required to prepare a traffic report pursuant to the 1988 Measure C requirements. Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 3 B. Drainage and Flood Control: The Project will be conditioned to collect and convey all storm waters entering or originating within the project to an adequate natural or manmade water course. The Final Map may not be filed until the collect and convey requirements and improvements have been met. C. Water and Waste Disposal: The project site is within the East Bay Municipal Utility District and West County Wastewater Sanitary District service areas. The Subject Property is not within the West County Wastewater District boundary and must be annexed. Both districts have indicated that capacity exists to support the development. D. Fire Protection: The nearest fire protection station is Station #70 located at 1392 San Pablo Dam Road, San Pablo, CA. Staff has determined that the project site is within 2.83 miles of this station. E. Public Protection: The Growth Management Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff Facility station per 1,000 population. The population increase associated with this project is 999 persons which is below the standard and considered not significant. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the applicant is required to establish a police services tax district to mitigate the impacts of the development on police services. F. Parks & Recreation: The proposed project will result in an increase in the demand for park and recreation facilities. Therefore, the project shall increase the developed park area acreage or pay in-lieu park dedication fees. Payment of park dedication fees will be comprised of a Quimby Act fee and a North Richmond Park Enhancement fee amounting to a total of$7,235.00 per residential unit to mitigate impacts. II. Measure C-1988 and Related Resolutions A. This Board has considered the Project's compliance with the traffic service objectives of Measure C-1988, the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program and related Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) resolutions. B. Measure C-1988 established a Growth. Management Program, "to assure that future residential, business and commercial growth pays for the facilities required to meet the demands resulting from that growth." The Program requires the County to adopt Traffic Level of Service (LOS) Standards keyed to types of land use, and to comply with the adopted standards; to. "adopt a development mitigation program to ensure that new growth is paying its share of the costs associated with that growth;" to participate in the forum established by the Authority to cooperate in easing cumulative traffic impacts, using the CCTA computer model; and to Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 4 develop an implementation program that creates housing opportunities for all income levels. C. The County has complied with all these requirements. Most important, the County is achieving Measure C-1988's overarching goal that development pay its own way. The County has identified Project mitigations to ensure that the Applicant will defray the cost of those improvements that are proportionately attributable to the development. III. General Plan Consistency A. The Project is consistent with the General Plan as it is proposed for amendment under the General Plan Amendment, County File: GP#04- 0008, wherein the Subject Property would be re-designated to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM) under the Land Use Element Map. The Project entails residential development of 370 units of three housing types over 29.2 acres resulting in a residential density of 14 units to the net acre, which is compatible with density range of 12 to 21.9 units to the net acre under the Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density designation. The General Plan Amendment approved for this Project will not cause the General Plan to become internally inconsistent. The General Plan Amendment and the remainder of the General Plan comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the County. The various land uses authorized for the Project, and each of its components, are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan. and conforms to the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The Project will further the objectives and policies of the General Plan and not obstruct their attainment. The Project is compatible with, and does not frustrate General Plan goals and policies. The Project is in harmony with the policies of the General Plan. B. This Board has considered the effects of the Project on the housing needs of the region and balanced those needs against the public service needs of County residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. The Project helps to achieve a desirable balance. The Project provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. The site as designed for the Project is physically suitable for the development proposed. C. The General Plan comprises many objectives, policies, principles, programs, standards, proposals and action plans (collectively "policies"), as well as performance standards. At times the policies necessarily compete with each other. Examples of the tensions between General Plan policies are found between those policies that promote managed growth, and those that provide for protection of resources that exist because land is undeveloped (such as open space, visual resources and agricultural Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 5 land). As part of approving the Project, all applicable General Plan policies and the extent to which the Project conforms to each of those policies have been considered. D. This Board has fully evaluated the extent to which the Project achieves each policy, including those pertaining to compatibility of land uses, compliance with principles of the Urban Limit Line and the 65/35 Land Preservation Standard under Measure C-1990, protection of open space, standards regarding geology, soils and earthquake risks, hazardous materials, flood hazards and drainage, protection of water quality, protection of biological resources, transportation standards and goals, regional and local housing needs, jobs/housing balance, noise, protection of air quality, protection of visual resources, standards for public services and utilities, and protection of archeological and historical resources. This Board has also fully considered the Project's compliance with all performance standards in the General Plan, including the Growth Management Element policies and standards (including those for traffic levels of service), and performance standards for public services and facilities. E. This Board finds that through the development of 370 residential units of three types of housing, including townhouses, cluster homes, and condominiums, and the provision for 15% of the units to be affordable, the Project will help implement housing-related goals of the General Plan. F. This Board has evaluated the General Plan Amendment in the context of the 65/35 Land Preservation Standard as more fully described in the Land Use Element to the General Plan and determined that the adoption of this General Plan Amendment to re-designate the Subject Property to a residential use designation in support of the proposed residential development will not have any negative consequences in maintaining the 65/35 land preservation standard since the change in designation is between two urban use designations and does not affect land designated for non-urban use. IV. Findings for Approval of Final Development Plan A. Required Finding: The Applicant intends to start construction within two and one-half years from the effective date of the zoning change and plan approval. Project Finding: The Applicant has expressed a desire to begin construction immediately after required permits and approvals have been obtained. Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 6 B. Required Finding: The proposed planned unit development is consistent with the General Plan. Project Finding: The Final Development Plan describes the development of a 370 residential unit project: 120 — 2 story Townhomes; 110 — 2 story cluster homes; and 140 — 1 and 2 story condominiums under the P-1: Planned Unit Development District for North Richmond. Of these, 56 units would be affordable units. All parking for the residential development would be provided on-site. A total of 6.4 acres of open space/park area is proposed. The Final Development Plan would result in an overall density of 14 units to the acre, which is consistent with the recommended General Plan Amendment, County File: GP#04-0008, to re-designate the Subject Property to the Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density. The Multiple Family Residential— Medium Density designation as described in the Land Use Element provides for a density range of 12 to 21.9 units to the net acre, and at 14 units to the net acre the Project would be compatible with the range of density under this use designation . C. Required Finding: In the case of residential development, it will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community. Proiect Finding : An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan indicating changes to the Land Use Element and maps would be required. The Subject Property would need to be re-designated from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multiple-Family Residential - Medium Density to allow for the development of the 370 unit residential project. The re- designation and resulting development would continue the extension of residential development in North Richmond to the north along Richmond Parkway. As this area is in redevelopment and in transition, this change in landscape can be seen as unifying the community, a less than significant impact. The Project is introducing a new concept in development that is precedent. The applicant is promoting a unique architectural quality and subdivision pattern that will set a standard for future augmentation in the North Richmond area. The desirability of the Project lies in its aesthetic quality and its lot configuration. The Project provides for a density level consistent with the proposed General Plan amendment to the Land Use Element redesignating the property from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple-Family Residential— Medium Density (MM) and will provide for a mix of housing types, including single-family residences, townhouses, Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 7 and condominiums. The addition of landscaping will increase the visual and aesthetic characteristic of the project. This new use of an underutilized industrial land helps fulfill the goals and policies of the Housing Element within the General Plan. Contact: P. Roche,Adv. Planning,CDD(335-1242) 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND cc: Community Development Department ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF CAO SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN County Counsel ATTESTED JOHN C LLEN, CLERK70F THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY EPUTY GAAdvanoe Planningtadv-plan\General Plan Ammdmenis\gpo4-000SNovePropGPA\Board Resolution 200744 Nove GPA FDP.dm Board Resolution No. 2007/44 Page 8 EXHIBTY" 2 County Planning Commission Resolution No. 5-2007 RESOLUTION NO. 5-2007 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE REQUESTED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE "NOVE PROPERTY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT" IN THE NORTH RICHMOND AREA OF SAID COUNTY WHEREAS, Signature Properties (Applicant) and Nove Investments (Owner) have proposed a residential development on 29.2+ acres in the unincorporated North Richmond area of Contra Costa County comprised of two parcels with Assessor's Parcel Numbers 408-180-010 and 408-170-072 (together, the "Subject Property") for which an applications including a General Plan Amendment, Development Plan, and Subdivision Map were received by the Community Development Department on March 31, 2005. The residential development (the "Project") would create 370 units: 120 — 2 story townhomes; 110 — 2 story cluster homes, and 140 condominiums (both 1 and 2 stories); and, 15% of the total 370 units, or 57 units, would be set aside as affordable units. The Project also proposes to reserve a total of 6.7 +-acres of open space/park area within the Subject Property; and, all parking for the Project would be provided on-site. WHEREAS, as a result of consultation between the Applicant, County staff, and other parties, the Applicant had subsequently modified their original proposal, as described in their applications for General Plan Amendment, Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Map which were submitted on March 31, 2005, to address concerns about the Project and submitted a revised site plan and vesting tentative map, dated September 7, 2006, with the result that the Project revised the layout and reduced the number of lots from 374 to 370 lots amongst other changes. WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines, a report dated October 18, 2006 and Initial Mitigated Negative Declarationlaration for the Nove Property(the "Initial Study") was prepared to determine whether an environmental impact report should be prepared for the Project. WHEREAS, the Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, utilities and service systems, hydrology and water quality, noise, air quality, geology and soils, public services, transportation traffic and utilities and services, the Initial Study recommended mitigation measures which would reduce each identified impact to a less than significant level. - 1 - County Planning Commission Resolution No.5-2007 WHEREAS, on October 23, 2006 the County published a Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, which Notice recited the foregoing facts, indicated that the Applicant had agreed to accept each mitigation measure recommended by the Initial Study, started a period for public comments on adequacy of the environmental documents related to the Project that ran initially to November 21, 2006. WHEREAS, before approving the General Plan Amendment and Final Development Plan, the Board of Supervisors shall certify the mitigated negative declaration covering the development authorized by the approvals for the project (the "Mitigated Negative Declaration") and adopted related finding. WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, January 9, 2007 whereat all persons interested therein might appear and be heard. WHEREAS, on Tuesday, January 9, 2007, the County Planning Commission fully reviewed, considered, and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter. WHEREAS, on Tuesday, January 9, 2007, Commissioner Richard Clark made a motion to approve the actions listed below with the revision of two conditions of approval as follows: Condition of Approval #13 —additional sentence In consultation with any interested neighbors, the applicant shall submit an appropriately strengthened disclosure statement (for future homebuyers), and/or changes to the plan, to the Zoning Administrator addressing the odor and noise issues raised during public hearing (County Planning Commission meeting on January 9, 2007). The Zoning Administrator shall review and recommend an appropriate disclosure statement to the Board of Supervisors during their review of the County Planning Commission's action. Condition of Approval# 18—3rd bullet point The project shall be subject to a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (CHAD). Before the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department all necessary documentation for review by the County Planning Commission to recommend to the Board of Supervisors, the formation of a GRAD, including a Plan of Control, and the implementation of an assessment on all properties within the GHAD boundaries to support the activities of the GHAD as identified.by the Plan of Control. -2- County Planning Commission Resolution No.5-2007 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County Planning Commission ("this Commission")takes the following actions: 1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq.), and the County's own CEQA Guidelines (together, "CEQA"), this Commission FINDS that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MMD") is adequate for the purposes of compliance with CEQA and ADOPTS the MND for the Project. The County Planning Commission ADOPTS these findings specifically for each of the Approvals and Entitlements it approves or recommends for approval for the Project. The Commission CERTIFIES that it has been presented with the Initial Study and that it has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study and the other, information in the record prior to making the following certifications and findings. The Commission further certifies that the Initial Study reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis, and that the Initial Study has been completed in compliance with the CEQA Regulations. 4 2. Recommends to the Board of Supervisors ADOPTION of the General Plan Amendment, County File:GP#04-000 8, changing the General Plan land use designations for the Subject Property from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM and recommends that the Board ADOPT the ) findings in support of this General Plan Amendment.. 3. Recommends to the Board of Supervisors APPROVAL of the Preliminary and Final Development Plan, County File: DP#05-3024, subject to the conditions of approval, and subject to the mitigation measures contained in the MND for this Project. 4. This Commission APPROVES the Vesting Tentative Map (County File: SD#05-8938) for the Project subject to the mitigation measures, conditions of approval, and adoption of the General Plan Amendment and approval of the Preliminary and Final Development Plan by the Board of Supervisors and this Commission ADOPTS the necessary findings supporting such approval under the attachment entitled "Findings and Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Map (County File: SD#05-8938) AND Preliminary/Final Development Plan (County File: DP#053024) as approved by the County Planning Commission on January 9, 2007'and hereby incorporated into this resolution. NOW BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of this Commission will sign and attest the certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors, all in accordance with the Government Code of the State of California. -3- County Planning Commission Resolution No.5-2007 This Resolution was approved upon motion of the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, January 9, 2007 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Battaglia, Clark, Murray, Terrell, Wong and Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Gaddis ABSTAIN: None Donald Snyder Chair of the County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa, State of California ATTEST: C�c Dennis M. Barry, Secretary County of Contra Costa State of California GAAdvance Planning\adv-plan\General Plan Ammdmmts\gp04-0008NovePropGPA\CPC Res.No.1-2007.dm -4- County Planning Commission Resolution No.5-2007 EXHIBIT 3 Conditions of Approval with Staff Recommended Modification to COA#13 - Noise, re: Disclosure Statement and COA#18 - Geological Conditions re: GHAD Formation FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (COUNTY FILE: SD#05-8938) AND PRELIMINARY/FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (COUNTY FILE: DP#05-3024) AS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, FEBRUARY 13, 2007 �4 FINDINGS A. General Plan Consistency 1. The Project is consistent with the General -Plan as it is proposed for amendment under the General Plan Amendment, County File: GP#04-0008; wherein the Subject Property would be re-designated to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density under the Land Use Element Map. The Project entails residential development of 370 units of three housing types over 29.2 acres resulting in a residential density of 14 units to the net acre, which is compatible with density range of 12 to 21.9 units to the net acre under the Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density designation. The General Plan Amendment approved for this Project will not cause the General Plan to become internally inconsistent. The General Plan Amendment and the remainder of the General Plan comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the County. The various land uses authorized for the Project, and each of its components, are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs.specified in the General Plan. and conforms to the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The Project will further the objectives and policies of the General Plan and not obstruct their attainment. The Project is compatible with, and does not frustrate General Plan goals and policies. The Project is in harmony with the policies of the General Plan. 2. The Board has considered the effects of the Project on the housing needs of the region and balanced those needs against the public service needs of County residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. The Project helps to achieve a desirable balance. The Project provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. The site as designed for the Project is physically suitable for the development proposed. 3. The General Plan comprises many objectives, policies, principles, programs, standards, proposals and action plans (collectively "policies"),. as. well.as performance standards. At times the policies necessarily compete with.each other. Examples. of the tensions between General Plan policies are found between those policies that promote managed growth,:and those that provide. for protection of resources.that exist because land is undeveloped (such as open space, visual resources and agricultural land). As part of approving the Page 1 of 41 Project, all applicable General Plan policies and the extent to which the Project conforms to each of those policies have been considered. 4. The Board has fully evaluated the extent to which the Project achieves each policy, including those pertaining to compatibility of land uses, compliance with principles of the Urban Limit Line and Measure C-1990, protection of open space, standards regarding geology, soils and earthquake risks, hazardous materials, flood hazards and drainage,protection of water quality; protection of biological resources, transportation standards and goals, regional and local housing needs, jobs/housing balance, noise, protection of air quality, protection of visual resources, standards for public services and utilities, and protection of archeological and historical resources. The Commission has also fully considered the Project's compliance with all performance standards in the General Plan, including the Growth a Management Element policies and standards (including those for traffic levels of service), and performance standards for public services and facilities. 5. The Board finds that through the development 370 residential units of three types of housing, including townhouses, cluster homes, and condominiums, and the provision for 15% of the units to be affordable, the Project will help implement housing-related goals of the General Plan. 6. The'Board acknowledges that the existing General Plan designations for the Subject Property were originally intended to provide for land related to industrial uses. The pending General Plan Amendment is intended to re- designate the site to a residential designation in support of a residential development. B. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: The project will generate an estimated 370 additional AM and PM peak hour trips. Because the project would generate more than 100 peak period trips, the applicant was required to prepare a traffic report pursuant to the 1988 Measure C requirements. 2. Drainage and Flood Control: Conditions #96 and #97 require that the applicant collect and convey all storm waters entering or originating within the project to an adequate natural or manmade water course. The Final Map may not be filed until the collect and convey requirements and improvements have been met. 3. Water and Waste Disposal: The project site is within the East Bay Municipal Utility District and West County Wastewater. Sanitary District service areas. The property is not within the West County Wastewater Paae 2 of 41 District boundary and must be annexed. The district has indicated that capacity exists to support the development. 4. Fire Protection: The nearest fire protection station is Station 470 located at 1392 San Pablo Dam Road, San Pablo, CA. Staff has determined that the project site is within 2.83 miles of this station. 5. Public Protection: The Growth Management Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff Facility station per 1.000 population. The population increase associated with this project is 999 persons which is below the standard and considered not significant. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the applicant is required to establish a police services tax district to mitigate the impacts of the development on police services. 6. Parks & Recreation: The proposed project will result in an increase in the demand for park and recreation facilities. Therefore, the project shall increase the developed park area acreage or pay in-lieu park dedication fees. Payment of park dedication fees will be comprised of a Quimby Act-fee and a North Richmond Park Enhancement fee amounting to a total of$7,235.00 per residential unit to mitigate impacts. C. Measure C-1988 and Related Resolutions 1. The Board has considered the Project's compliance with the traffic service objectives of Measure C-1988, the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program and related Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) resolutions. 2. Measure C-1988 established a Growth Management Program, "to assure that future residential, business and commercial growth pays for the facilities required to meet the demands resulting from that growth." The � Program requires the County to adopt Traffic Level of Service (LOS) Standards keyed to types of land use; and to comply with the adopted standards; to "adopt a development mitigation program to ensure that new growth is paying its share of the costs associated with that growth;'' to participate in the forum established by the Authority to cooperate in easing cumulative traffic impacts, using the CCTA computer model; and to develop an implementation program that creates housing opportunities for all income levels. 3. The County has complied with all these requirements. Most important, the County is achieving Measure C-1988's overarching goal that development pay its own way. The County has identified Project mitigations to ensure that the Applicant will defray the cost of those improvements that are proportionately attributable to the development. Page 3 of 41 D. Findinas for Approval of a Preliminary or Final Development Plan. 1. Required Finding:-The Applicant intends to start construction within two and one-half years from the effective date of the zoning change and plan approval. Project Finding: The Applicant has expressed a desire to begin construction immediately after required permits and approvals have been obtained. 2. Required Finding: The proposed development plan is consistent with the General Plan. ^i Project Finding: An amendment to the Land Use Element of the County General Plan re-designating two parcels totaling 292 acres from Heavy 4' and Light Industry to Multi-Family Residential — Medium Density. The Final Development Plan describes a development of 370 residential unit. project: 120—2 story Townhomes; 110—2 story cluster homes; and 140—1 and 2 story condominiums. Of these, 36 units would be affordable units. All parking would be onsite. A total of 6.7 acres of open space/park is proposed. �. Required Finding: In the case of residential development, it will constitute a f! residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community. p Project Finding_: An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan indicating changes to the Land Use Element and maps would be required. The General Plan Land Use Element would need to re-designate the parcel from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multiple-Family Residential - Medium �I Density and allow.for the development of the 370 unit project. The re-designation and resulting development would continue the extension of residential development to the north. As this area is in. redevelopment and in , transition, this change in the pattern of development can be seen as unifying the community, a less than significant impact. The proposed project is introducing a new concept in development that is precedent. The Applicant is promoting a unique architectural quality and subdivision pattern that will set a standard for future augmentation in the North Richmond area. The desirability of the project lies in _its aesthetic quality and its lot configuration. The project provides for a density level consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element re-designating Page 4 of 41 I the property.from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multiple-Family Residential - Medium Density that also produces single-family residences. The addition of landscaping will increase the visual and aesthetic characteristic of the project. This use of an underutilized property helps fulfill the goals and policies of the Housing Element within General Plan. E. Findings for Approval of Tentative Map 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans required by law. Project Finding. The project is contingent with the Board of Supervisor's approval of the Proposed General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element re-designating the property from Heavy Industry and,Light Industry to Multi-Family Residential - Medium Density. With this amendment the proposed project mould be consistent with the various elements of the General Plan. The proposed land use designation is Multiple Family Residential-Medium Density, which allows for multiple and single- family medium-density development. The tentative map provides for 370 residential lots on 29.2-acres comprised of hyo parcels, which complies with the density requirement. The project is also consistent with the policies•for North Richmond P=I:• Planned Unit Development Zoning District. 2. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. Project Finding.- Public Works requires that the project coapt} with collect and convey regulations, storm drainage_facilities, and design standcirds.for• construction o private roads. The Count , Geologist stated that the site is fP h O suitable for construction from a geologic standpoint with the implementation of the geologic mitigations. Buildings must comply With the requirements of the California and Uniform Building Codes. Page 5 of 41 C C.1NDITIONS OF APPROVAL, Administr adye 1. _ _ This at>i>roval is based on the Preliminary and Final Develomnent Plan tend the Vestin�-) Tentative Mara dated September 7. 1-006 and on the exhibits received by the ComnwiilTv Develol)ment D.CDartment listed as folio%�!s: A. Exhibit A --- Sheet 1) 1 of Title Sheet - Preliminary and Final Development Plan. .Vesting Tentative IN-1an dated September 7. 2006 by tiac C'oinmrirnity :1)evelonment Dcixartment f6r 370 lots and 56 affordable units on the 29.? acre site. B. Exhibit B --- Sheet 211-1 of 5-Preliimnary and Ffflal DeyeloUmellt Plan. I C. Exhibit C' ---Sheet 31) of 5- Lot Dimension Platt. D. Exhibit: D --- Sheet 4D of 5- Preiiminary Parking Layout Plan, P E. I:xlilbit E --- Sheet 51) of >— ypicral Street Sections and 'I.vnical Setbacks. F. Exhibit F --- Sheet IC of 8 - I itle Sheet - V estin� 'I entatic �'la>> Subdivision 8938 - Nove Property. G. Exhibit G --- Sheet 2C: of 8-Exi`tin.L�, Condition and Boundary Mal) H. F'xhibit 1-1 --- Sheet 3C; of R - 1�tiistM TreL Plan. A L E:xlnibit I --- Sheet 4C o.1'8 - Geotechnical Condition Plan. J. P-diibit J --- Sheet SC; of 8 - L,ot Dimension Placa. K. E_',xhibit IC --- Sheet (C: of 8-Grzidin«Plan L. 1-:hhibI't I- --- Sheet: 7C of 8 --fli-Clin Mar} Uttilitv Plan. M. Exhibit M --- Sheet 8C; of S - Tunical Street Sedacks, L "ho ,!iflionie Fine GradmL Derail. N. Exhibit Iti --- Motor D}urt Buildin_rs Bw1din« Eleymions. stamp-'ci received lhv the Coma n.ity D.\;elom-rient Demrtmem March 28. 200 . SMn)Ile Famdv Homes. Buildins 1?letatio is. stamped received bv.tlae Conan unity Development Department March 1-4. 2005 Colored 5 Unit Townhouse Building Scheme 2 Conceptual Front Elevation stamped f Page 6 of 41 til received by the Community Development Department on December 14, 2006. This ant}roval is also based ttt>on the folloNvInLI rcl')Orts: O. CUltural ResotlTCes Sttrdyprepared by LSA dated January 31. 2005. P. Pl'iase ll .Jivironnnental Site Assessment prepared lav Dread«%ell and Kollo dated .lanuar-v 11. "00=1. Q. Truck, Ll%eight I.:irnitations Survey for West C01111-3 COSta C',ounty- prepared by 1)ow]ML,, Associates dated December. 2001 . R. Residential Develoi1ment Environmental Noise Study nrepared by Charles M. Salter- Associates. Inc. dated January. 2005. S. Nove Property Traffic :Assessment prepared by Dowlin_, :Associates. Inc. dated on JWittarv. 2005. T. .Arborist Report. Nove Site prepared by LSA dated .lulu 16. 200 . U. Geotechnical Exploration prepared by Eng-lo dated Marcl7 30. 2005. h V. GeoloLical Peer R.cvieN premared by Dar"vin Mvers ..Associates dated A *126. 2(10>. W. Resnonse to Peer Review prepared bv l naeo dated July l 1. 2005. X. GeoloLical Peer prepared by Darwin h-lvers Associates dated Rik; 11. 200 . YT, Preliminary Storm t\Vater Cotltrol Plan gremared by Ruu.Leri-Jerise:n-Azgr ;'associates dated September 29, 2006. The followina conditions shall be met prior to issuance of a building permit unless otherwise specified. The approval- of the Preliminary-and Final Development Plan DP#03024 shall run concurrently with the time limits of subdivision file SD#058938. Except as specified in these conditions and the exhibits described in Condition #1 above, the guide for development shall be subject to the North Richmond P-1 Zoning District. Guide for minimum yard standards shall generally be as follows: �I Page 7 of 41 A. For the Townhomes, shown as lots 111 through 136 on Sheet 21) of 5 frtiiiminary and. Final Develonnie.nt Play:. Front: 8 feet from property line; Side: zero feet (attached); total 22 Feet between buildings: Side yards adjacent to Richmond Parkway shall be no less than 6.5 feet; side yards adjacent to a street shall be no less than 7 feet; Rear: 8 feet. B. For the Condominiums, shown as lots 137 though 145 on Shea, 2D of — Preliminarv� and Final Development Plan. Front: 8 feet from property line; Side: zero feet (attached); Building Side: 9 feet; Total 29 Feet between buildings sides; Total 33 Feet between buildings rears; Side.yards adjacent to a street shall be no less than 9 feet C. For the Single-family Court Homes, lots 1 through 65, 71 through 100, and 104 through 108 on Sheet 213 of 5 — Preliniinary and Final Deyelonnient Pian.. Front: 2 feet from property line; II Side: 3 feet; aggregate side 6 Feet; Side yards adjacent to a street shall be no less than 6 feet. Rear: 4 feet. D. For the Single-family Homes, lots 66 through 70, 101, 102, 103, 109, and 110 on Sheet 21) of:5—Preliminary and Final D velonment flan. Front: 18 feet from property line; Side: 3.5 feet; aggregate side 7 Feet; Side yards adjacent to a street shall be no less than 10 feet. Rear: 6 feet. E. Prior to issuance of building permits, an overall plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator showing buildina locations and siting dimensions. Zonina Administrator Review 4. _ The proposed buildings shall be similar to that shown on the submitted plans. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, elevations and architectural design of the building and building roofing material shall be submitted for final review and approval by the County Zoning Administrator. The roofs and n Page 8 of 41 exterior walls of the buildings shall be free of such objects as air conditioning" or utility equipment, television aerials. etc, or screened from view. 5. _ _ Prior to issuance of any building permits, an overall plan for lot development shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator which demonstrates compliance with the conditions herein. Minor Revision to Plans 6. — _ Thirty days prior to submittal of any proposed revisions to the site plan or architecture to the Zoning Administrator, the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council shall be provided an opportunity to review and comment on the revised plan. Compliance Report 7. _ _ At least 45 days prior to filing a final map or issuance of grading permit, which ever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a report on compliance with the conditions of approval with this permit for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The fee for this application is a deposit of$1,000 that is subject to time and materials costs. Should staff costs exceed the deposit, additional fees will be required. A. Except for those conditions administered by the Public Works Department, the report shall list each condition followed by a description of what the applicant has provided as evidence of compliance with that condition. The report shall also indicate whether the applicant believes that he has done all the applicant is in a position to do to comply with the applicable condition. (A copy of the computer file containing the conditions of approval may be available; to obtain a copy, contact the Community Development Department at (925) 335-1210. B. Unless otherwise indicated, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the condition of this report prior to filing the final rnap. Applicant Indemnification of County 8. _ _ Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider 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, or annul, the Agency's approval concerning this subdivision map application, which action is brought within the time period provided in Section 66499.37. The County will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. Page 9 of 41 of Archaeolow 9, _ _ The applicant is required to provide a qualified archaeologist to monitor any ground disturbance below the imported fill. Archaeological monitors shall be empowered to halt construction activities at the location of a discovery to review possible archaeological material and to protect.the resource while the finds are being evaluated. This monitoring shall continue until, in the archaeologist's judgment, cultural resources are not likely to be encountered. If deposits.of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the archaeological monitor evaluates the situation and provides recommendations. If archaeological deposits cannot be avoided, they should be evaluated for their significance in accordance with the California Register of Historical Resources. If the deposits are not eligible, further protection is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they will need, to be avoided or significant effects on them must be mitigated. M.M.V.a.– d. Child Care Conditions 10._ _ Prior to filing the final map the applicant shall comply with the County Child Care Ordinance. (Ch.92-22, County Ordinance Code). j TDM Condition 11. _ _ At least 30 days prior to filing the Final Map, the applicant shall submit a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) information program in accord with the requirements of Ordinance No. 92-31 for review and approval of the I Zoning Administrator. Applicant shall also comply with the County Growth Management Program and Bay Area Air Quality Management District reg7ulations regarding transportation. Bus Stop 12. — A bus stop shall be developed on the site subject to the review and approval of the local transit agency. The bus stop, if developed, shall consist of a covered bench or other suitable structure subject to transit agency review and approval, and Zoning Administrator review and approval. If the local transit agency does not want a bus stop in this area this requirement can be waived. Noise 13. _ _ Design and construct noise barriers to achieve acceptable noise exposures where reasonable and feasible (60 DNL or less single-family residential land uses and 65 DNL or less at multiple-family residential uses). The final r Page 10 of 41 I detailed design of the heights and limits of proposed noise barriers shall be completed at the time that the final grading plan is submitted. M.M.XI.a. aIId HE ISM llqAr- Om gym: ePrior to Final Map record the document entitled "Disclosure Statement ReaurdinL, Adjacent IMACC Facility". as agreed to by Sianature Properties and representatives of IMACC. . to inform fixture honiebuvers about the nature and extent of industrial-related operations within the IMACC facility. which is located on Pittsburg, Avenue directly across from the Nove Propmti% 14. — ` The California Building Code and Contra Costa County require project specific acoustical analysis to achieve interior noise .levels of 45 DNL or lower in residential units exposed to exterior noise levels greater than 60 provision of forced-air mechanical ventilation in noise environments exceeding 60 DNL,'so that windows could be kept closed at the occupant's discretion to control noise. Special building construction techniques (e.g., sound-related windows and building fagade treatments) may be required where exterior noise levels exceed 65 DNL. These doors, sound rated exterior wall assemblies, acoustical caulking, etc. conducted on a unit-by-unit basis during project design. Results of the analysis, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, will be submitted along with the building plans and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. M.M.XI.a. 15._ _ Concurrently with the recordation of the Final Map, record a statement to run with the deeds to the property notifying future occupants, of the project that they may experience noise due to their proximity to facilities that result in such noise. In addition, provide comparable notification in the CC&Rs for the project. Information regarding the sources of noise and actions that citizens can take (e.g., phone numbers for reporting complaints) shall be provided. M.M.XLa.2. Geological Conditions 16. _ _ The applicant shall comply with the specific standards and criteria for use in design and construction of the project (site grading, drainage and foundation design) as identified in the ENGEO Report. MM VI.a.i., ii. and iii. Page 11 of 41 17. _ _ At least 30 days prior to the issuance of building permits provide the following where possible under C-3 requirements and subject to mitigation measures set forth in the Adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration in Section VIII: ■ Criteria and standards for rapid removal of surface water runoff foundation systems. ■ All surface water should be collected and discharged into-a storm drainage system, including rear yards (area drains). ■ The use of catch basin inserts, vegetated swales or biofilters, roof runoff controls, or permeable parking areas shall be used to collect, filter, and reduce the amount of pollutants entering the stormwater system. ■ CC&R's shall address the need tolimit irrigation and include an appropriate landscape planting pallet. M.M.VI.a.iii. and c. Subsequent to implement the proposed surcharge program, the applicant shall provide the following: ■ Details of surcharge monitoring by ENGEO and materials (and technical data) in a grading completion report. ■ Topographic survey map after placement of surcharge. M M.VI d ME feep :s �r ..�+e .•.... .._ ,..,-^ �. ,. ....:�P� s ..,, , sur _., --- `.. .:� 2x��',•��" �"•y�'jr,�re C' .t _Dl, Pedestrian Trails 19. _ The applicant shall record a public pedestrian trail easement through the project which shall be offered for dedication to the County, or other appropriate public agency. The location and size of easement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. If the easement is not accepted within 10 years, the County may consider allowing abandonment of the offer. Landscaping 20, A landscaping and irrigation plan for all areas shown .on the plan, including front yards, shall be submitted for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator at least 60 days prior to the recording of the Final Map. A cost estimate shall be submitted with the landscaping program plan. The landscaping plan shall comply with the County Water Conservation Page 12 of 41 Landscaping Ordinance 82-26 and shall be installed prior to approval of the final building permit. The plan shall be prepared by a licensed architect and shall be certified to be in compliance with the County Water Conservation Ordinance. California native drought tolerant plant or tree shall be used as much as possible. All trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallon size; all shrubs shall be a minimum 1 gallon size.except as otherwise noted. Submit a street tree planting plan prior to recording the Final Map. A minimum of 15 gallon trees shall be planted along the streetscape. 23. __ All open space, median strip, and private lot landscaping shall consist of non- invasive, drought-tolerant, low-water use plant species. 24. -- Privately maintained open space shall be suitably landscaped with scattered California native plant materials. A landscaping plan for these areas shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Landscaping in this area shall be installed prior to occupancy. 25. _ _ Prior to occupancy, an on-site inspection shall be made of privately owned lands by a licensed landscape professional to determine compliance with the approved landscape plan. A certification of completion shall be.submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval. 26. _ If occupancy is requested prior to the installation of the landscape and irrigation improvements, then either: (1) a cash deposit; (2) a bond; or (3) a letter of credit, shall be delivered to the County for 125 percent of the estimated cost of the uncompleted portion of the landscape and irrigation improvements. If compliance is not achieved after six months of occupancy as determined by the County Zoning Administrator, the County shall contract for the completion of the landscaping and irrigation improvements to be paid for by the held sum. The County shall return the unused portion within one year of receipt or at the completion of all work. 27. _ _ At least 60 days prior to the issuance of a building permit for the soundwall, the applicant shall develop a detailed Landscape Plan that is acceptable to the City of Richmond and reviewed and approved by the County Zoning Administrator. The applicant shall provide evidence to the County of the City of Richmond's acceptance. MM I.e. Fencing 28. _ Prior to the recording of the Final Map, the applicant shall submit a fencing plan program. The approved program shall be attached to the CC&R's. Page 13 of 41 Sian s/Walls/Liahtina: 29. _ _ All signs shall be subject -to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. No other outside displays are permitted. 30. _ _ The design, color and location of any project sign at the entrance to the property shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator. 31. _ The details of the design; location, color and type of materials for masonry walls shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator at least 30 days prior to recording the Final Map. The soundwalls shall be of high quality design in appearance and durability. 32. _ _ At least 30 days prior to issuance of building permits, an exterior lighting plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The plan shall include details of location and design of outside lighting fixtures, proposed screening and hours of operation of exterior lighting. Affordable Housing—Redevelopment Aaencv Inclusionary Requirements 33. _ _ The Agency has determined that it will consider both on-site and off-site housing affordability options, or a combination'of on and off-site options. As of the date of project approval no defined off-site alternative(s) have been identified and agreed to by the parties. Prior to recording a Final Map the Redevelopment Agency (Agency) and the developer shall agree to an affordable housing program which conforms to the following conditions. In the absence of an agreement the developer shall be obligated to provide the affordable units ori-site. Restrictions 34. For-sale Inclusionary units shall be deed restricted in order to ensure the continued affordability of these units for forty-five (45) years in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section .33334.3 (Redevelopment Law). Rental Inclusionary units shall be deed restricted in order to ensure the continued affordability of these units for fifty-five (55) years .in accordance with Redevelopment Law. For purposes of this condition, the following definitions shall apply: A. Moderate Income Households — Households earning up to 120 percent of the area median income for Contra Costa County as adjusted' for family size as defined in Section 50093 .of the California Health & Safety Code. Page 14 of 41 B. Lower Income Households —Households earning up to 80 percent of the area median income (AMI) for Contra Costa County as adjusted for family size as defined in Section 50079.5 of the California Health & Safety Code. C. Very-Low Income Households — Households earning up to 50 percent AMI for Contra Costa County as adjusted for family size as defined in Section 50105 of the California Health & Safety Code. D. Affordable Sales Price — the maximum sales price for inclusionary units shown shall be set by the Deputy Director for Redevelopment as defined by Government Code Section 50025.5 and Health &Safety Code Section 33334.22. E. Affordable rent means a rent, including. a .reasonable utility allowance determined by the Community Development Director, that does not exceed the following calculations pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 50053: Very-low income: 50 percent AMI, adjusted for assumed household size, multiplied by 30 percent and divided by 12. Lower income: 60 percent AMI, adjusted for assumed household size, multiplied by 30 percent and divided by 12. F. Sale price and rent calculations shall take into account unit size with the following assumptions: Studio = 1 person One bedroom = 2 persons Two bedrooms = 3 persons Three bedrooms = 4 persons Four bedrooms = 5 persons Five bedrooms = 6 persons G. The sales price calculation shall also take into account Anticipated Financing so that Housing Costs do not exceed the limits in Paragraphs H and I below. "Anticipated :Financing" means private mortgage financing at current interest rates and terms. Anticipated Financing may include approved public agency down payment or second mortgage grants and loans. Page 15 of 41 "Housing Costs" include mortgage principal and interest, property insurance, property taxes, homeownership association dues, and expected utility costs. Affordable Sales Price shall not exceed the market price maximum. H. A minimum of forty (40%) percent of the inclusionary units (23 units) shall be sold or rented to Very-Low Income households at an Affordable Sales Price or Rent. L An additional sixty (60%) percent of the inclusionary units (33 units) shall be sold to Lower and Moderate-Income Households at an Affordable Sales Price. These units shall be split approximately 50/50 between Lower Income (16 units) and Moderate Income (17 units) units. Term 35. _ Inclusionary units restricted pursuant to Paragraphs H and I above shall remain affordable to and occupied by the Target Population for a minimum of forty-five (45) years for for-sale units or fifty-five (55) years for rental units from the date of issuance of a.certificate of occupancy for the project. Locale 36.� _ On-site inclusionary units shall be provided throughout the project, and placed throughout the development in a manner such that the size (including number of bedrooms) and quality of inclusionary units reflect the proportions in the total development, and that the inclusionary units be spatially dispersed. Prior to filing of a Final Map, the applicant shall submit to the Deputy Director for Redevelopment/Zoning Administrator a plan for review and approval designating the proposed location of inclusionary units., Miscellaneous 37._ _ A. The applicant shall enter into a Developer Sales Agreement (form to be approved by the County) with the County at least 90 days prior to issuance of building permits for the model homes, which ensures that the number of units equals to at least 56 of the approved units are affordable to and occupied by Very-Low, Lower, and Moderate Income Households. B. The owner hereby represents, warrants, and covenants that it will cause this 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 owner shall pay all fees and charges incurred in connection with any such recording Page 16 of 41 C. The County will provide to the Applicant income certification forms to be completed by the purchasers. The income levels of all Very-Low; Lower, and Moderate Income Household applicants for units in the project shall be certified prior to initial occupancy by the Applicant and records shall be maintained by the Applicant for a minimum of seven (7) years. D. All units in the project shall be.available for sale 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 selling the units, except to the extent that the units are required to be sold to Very-Low and Moderate 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 sale of any unit in the Project nor shall the Owner or any person claiming under or through Owner, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use, or occupancy of purchasers of any unit or in connection with employment of persons, for the construction of the project. E. Applicant shall work with a local non-profit housing agency (Non- Profit) to market the inclusionary units and to determine eliaibility of the inclusionary unit buyers. Once a Nove inclusionary unit becomes available for sale, Applicant shall provide such agency with the following information regarding the unit: sales price, address of unit, unit size expressed in number of square feet, number of bedrooms and bathrooms, other property amenities, income restrictions, other special financing restrictions and photos of unit. Applicant shall coordinate marketing activities of the Inclusionary units with Non-Profit. Special marketing attention shall be given to residents of North Richmond. Inclusionary units shall be marketed through local non-profit, social service, faith-based, and other organizations that have potential purchasers as clients or constituents. Current residents and Non-Profit program participants will be encouraged to spread the word- of available inclusionary units to their family members, friends, and acquaintances. Applicant shall translate marketing materials into Spanish, Lao, Mien. and Chinese: Marketing may also include publicity through local television and radio stations as well as local newspapers including the West County and Contra Costa Times, Oakland Tribune, Homeowner Resource, Classified Flea Market, El Mensajero. Thoi Bao Magazine, Page 17 of 41 Berkeley/Richmond/San Francisco Posts, Korea Times, El Mundo; Hankook Il Bo, and the Sing Tao Daily. F. Upon violation of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the Owner; the County may give written notice to the Owner 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 owner 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. Off-Site Alternative 38. _ _ The basic County requirement is that all inclusionary- units are to be r constructed on-site. However, the County may approve development of the inclusionary units at another site pursuant to the following requirements: A. The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency has agreed to an off-site altemative(s). B. The off-site alternative must be within the unincorporated North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area. C. The combination of location; unit size, unit type, tenure, pricing, and timing of availability of the proposed off-site inclusionary units would provide a greater benefit than would result from providing those inclusionary units on-site; as measured by a larger percent of affordable units, or a larger percent of very-low or low- income units. The Agency requires that at least fifty percent (50%), the off-site units be for-sale units. D. Any off-site inclusionary units must be constructed or rehabilitated prior to or concurrently with construction of the on-site residential development. E. The off-site development location must be appropriately zoned and all required entitlements issued for the off-site development alternative before the fifty-first (5151) building permit is issued for the on-site residential development. F. The County may consider any combination of on-site and off-site development. G. The Redevelopment Director may, at the request of the developer, extend the period of time for complying with these requirements with a finding that a good faith diligent effort has been made to identify and bring to a point of viability one or more off-site PaL,e 18 of 41 developments, and that it is reasonable to assume that additional time will permit the development of off-site alternatives. H. All other requirements of this section shall apply except as otherwise modified by the preceding. Multi-Familv Recvclina Area 39. _ _ Development plans with multiple-family residential projects shall indicate a suitable enclosed area for the purpose of locating recycling bins for paper, glass and cans. This area will be included in the computation of the 25 percent of lot"open area"required for the development. 40. — _ The refuse area shall be properly screened and gated. The Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the location and screening of the refuse area. Construction Period Development Activitv Restrictions 41. _ _ Contractor and/or developer shall comply with the following construction, noise, dust and litter control requirements. A. The project sponsor shall require their contractor and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition. B. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site notice that construction work will commence. The notice shall include a list of contact persons with name,. title, phone number and areas of responsibility. The person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be kept current at all times and shall consist of persons with authority to indicate and implement corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of individuals responsible for noise and litter control, tree protection, construction .traffic and vehicles, erosion control, and the 24-hour emergency number, shall be expressly identified in the notice. The notice shall be re-issued with each phase of major grading and construction activity. A copy of the notice shall be concurrently transmitted to the Community Development Department. The notice shall be accompanied by a list of the names and addresses of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area noticed. C. A dust and litter control program shall be. submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Any violation of the approved program or applicable ordinances shall require an immediate work Pa?e 19 of 41 stoppage. Construction work shall not be allowed to resume until; if necessary, an appropriate construction bond has been posted. D. The applicant shall make a good-faith effort to avoid interference with existing neighborhood traffic flows. Prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed roads serving this development shall be constructed to provide access to each lot. This shall include provision for an on-site area in which to park earth moving equipment. E. Transporting of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. and prohibited on Federal and State holidays. F. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. G. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and shall be 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/Presidents' Day (State and Federal) Lincoln's Birthday (State) _ Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day (State and Federal) Veterans Day (State and Federal) Thanksgiving Day (State and Federal) Day after Thanksgiving (State) Christmas Day (State and Federal) r For specific details on the actual day the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal Holidays littp://wwlv.opm.Qov/fedho1/2006.asp California Holidays http://www.edd.ca.nov/eddsthol.htm H. Utilize `'quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. Page 20 of 41 I. Prohibit unnecessary idling, of internal combustion engines. J. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in g,00d condition and appropriate for the equipment. K. Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. L. Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g,., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. M.M.XI.d. 42. _ _ The project shall comply with the dust control requirements of the Grading Ordinance including provisions pertaining to water conservation. Water 43. ` _ At least 30 days prior to recording the Final Map, the applicant shall provide proof that adequate water supply can be provided. The Project Sponsors shall secure a "will serve" letter from EBMUD that addresses the ability to serve the site with adequate supply and pressure. If the water line requires upgrading then the project shall provide its fair share contribution toward the costs of that upgrade. MM XVI.d. 44. _ _ The applicant shall comply with the Contra Costa County Ordinance pertaining to water conservation. Compliance with the Water Conservation Ordinance shall be designed to encourage low-flow water devices and other interior and exterior water conservation techniques. 45. — _ All toilets shall be low-flow units in accordance with Section 17921.3 of the Health and Safety Code; sinks and showers shall be water conserving units, in accordance with the California Energy Commission Standards for new residential buildings. Police Service District 46. — Election for Establishment,of a Police Services District to Augment Police Services – The owner of the property shall participate in the provision of funding to maintain and augment police services by voting to approve a special tax for the parcels created by.this subdivision approval. The tax shall be the per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment) then Page 21 of 41. established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to filing the Final Map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election, payable at the time the election is requested by the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Air Quality Construction Related 47. _ _ The following is a list of feasible control measures that the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines recommend for construction emissions of PMio. These conditions shall be implemented for all areas (both on-site and off-site) where construction activities would occur and be documented on a monthly basis via a construction report. 1. Sprinkle water to all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often when conditions warrant. 2. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. 3. Sweep daily all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. 4. Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. 5. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. 6. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). 7. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. 8. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. 9. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 10. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site. Paae 22 of 41 11. Suspend grading activities when winds exceed 25 miles per hour (mph) and visible dust clouds cannot be prevented from extending beyond active construction areas. MM III.a.l. Construction Equipment 48. _ _ The following conditions should be implemented to reduce NO, and .diesel particulate emissions from on-site construction equipment. At a minimum, these measures shall apply to the grading portion of the project: 1. Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from off-road diesel powered equipment. The project shall ensure that emissions from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be prohibited from use on the site until repaired. 2. Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. 3. The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors). 4. Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks onsite could keep engines running continuously MM III.a.I. Odors 49. -- Concurrently with the recordation .of the Final Map, record a statement to run with the deeds to the property notifying future occupants, of the project that they may experience odors due to their proximity to facilities that result in such odors. In addition, provide comparable notification in the CC&Rs for the project. Information regarding the sources of odors and actions that citizens can take (e.g., phone numbers for reporting complaints) shall be provided. MM III.e. CC&R's 50. - _ Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be submitted for review with the Final Map, and shall be subject to review and approval by the Zoning Page 23 of 41 Administrator. This document shall provide for establishment, ownership and maintenance of the common open space and parking, fire protection, fencing private streets and drainage maintenance, keeping of pets and establishment of signs. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) developed for this project shall include the following deed restrictions. Recreational vehicles, boats, boat trailers or mobilehomes shall only be stored or parked in garages. Exterior materials and colors shall not vary from the palette approved for the original homes, without administrative approval of the Zoning Administrator. 51. _ _ Except as specified in these conditions and the exhibits described above, the North Richmond P-1 Zoning District shall be the guide for development, subject to the Zoning Administrator's .review and approval at the time of issuance of building permits. Any request made subsequent to the approval of this project for modification of the standards of the project shall be made by recommendation of the homeowners association to the Zoning Administrator, prior to issuance of building permits. Condominium Development 52. _ A Homeowners Association shall be formed for the maintenance of the private streets and common areas shown on the Vesting Tentative Map and Preliminary and Final Development Plan. Street Names 53. _ ^ At least 30 days prior to filing the Final Map, proposed street names public and private shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department, Graphics Section (Phone #335-1270). Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by the Community Development Department without the approved street names. Underaround Storaae Tanks 54. _ _ Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, existing underground storage tanks, (UST) shall be properly closed and removed. Typically, USTs either have leaks or spills associated with their use. This current investigation tested soil and groundwater in the vicinity of known or suspected USTs, and detected only minor concentrations. However, Signature Properties shall anticipate some soil remediation (by over-excavation) will be required-when closing the USTs. The appropriate method of disposal for that soil will depend on the Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations measured at that time. Page 24 of 41 If the proposed site development plans require significant soil excavation and offsite disposal, additional soil sampling may be warranted to further characterize the soil for reuse or disposal. Should that occur, Treadwell & Rollo, or another equally qualified professional, shall be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made. Recommendations shall be subject to the review of the County Health Services Department and the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. All approved recommendations shall be implemented. The applicant shall advise any facilities which may receive soil excavated from this site during construction to confirm their compliance with County requirements. MM VILd. Stormwater Runoff 55. _ _ As the site is proposed to be a dense infill development, the following measures shall be incorporated to reduce impervious surfaces and to ensure adequate collection of stormwater runoff: A. Water Quality 1. Provide a Stormwater Control Plan that addresses the specific requirements of the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Ordinance, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook criteria, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board's requirements. 2. Minimization of streets and roads. 3. Maximization of open space for landscaping and recreation. 4. Open space areas (throughout the site) shall serve as tot lots and/or landscaping. 5. Pervious pavers shall be utilized to the maximum extent feasible. 6. Disconnected downspouts shall positively drain from splash block to landscaped areas. wherever feasible. 7. The project shall verify the adequacy of the nronosed detention/water quality basin and demonstrate that the existing downstream drainage system(s) that receives stormwater runoff from this project is adequate to convey the required design storm (based on the size and ultimate development density within the contributing watershed) and, if necessary, construct improvements including alternative methods such as grassy swales to guarantee adequacy. The project shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. PaC7e 25 of 41 8. The DA 19A Hydrology Map (Drawing FD-12425 dated November 30, 1984) assumes an ultimate density of 7 du/acre as opposed to the 14 du/acre assumed by this project. In order to determine the possible impacts to downstream facilities due to a higher volume of runoff associated with the increased density; a hydrology study shall be submitted to the County and the District for review prior to approving the improvement plans. Alternatively, the project shall be required to mitigate flow rates down to the density levels anticipated in the DA 19A Hydrology Map. 9. The project shall-. be required to 'obtain a Flood Control Encroachment Permit. 10.The project shall ensure that the HOA or other entity. other than the Countti. shall be responsible for operations and maintenance of the stormwater facilities. 11.The Landscape Plan calls out a "Connection to Existing Trail." This access point shall be approved by the Flood Control District and the EBRPD. MM VIII.a.,c.,d.,e., and L-1. B. Selection and Primary Design of Stormwater Treatment BMA. 1-. Impervious areas on the site, including all roofs, parking areas, and driveways have been divided into district drainage areas as shown on the Stormwater Control Plan. Runoff from each of these areas is proposed to be conveyed via storm drains to the detention basin. Grassy swales shall be located in the open space lots and paseo areas between the townhomes. All of the Grassy swales shall feature a minimum 12" depth of sandy loam material (minimum infiltration rate specified to be 5 inches per hour). Specific drainage areas and swales are shown in the Stormwater Control Plan and shall show the pervious and impervious area calculations. The construction-related activities that could result in water quality impacts, will need to be mitigated by the preparation and iniplem ntai`on of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). MM VIII.a., c., d., e. and f.2 Pa(ye 26 of 41 2. The project shall conform to the Source Control Measures. BMP Measures and Construction Plan C.3 Checklist, a SWPPP, and other water quality control measures as determined by .Contra Costa County. MM VIII.a., c., d., e. and f.3 First Source Hiring 56. — The applicant shall enter into a first source hiring agreement with the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency and shall provide proof to the County Zoning Administrator prior to commencing any construction activity on site. Communitv Facilities District 57. ! _ Applicant shall apply to Public Works for annexation to the Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2006-1 (North Richmond Area. Maintenance Services) for the future maintenance of area wide medians and landscaping. The annexation of property into the CFD must be completed prior to filing of the Final Map and the applicant should be aware that the annexation process may take approximately 60 days. Schools 58. _ A will-serve letter from the West Contra Costa Unified School District shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator prior to recording the Final Map. MM XIII.a.3. Parks 59._ _ The project shall increase the developed park area or pay in-lieu park dedication fees. The in-lieu fee is comprised of the Quimby Act Fee of $2,000 per unit in addition to the North Richmond Park Enhancement Fee of $5,235 per unit for a total $7,235 per unit. MM XIILa.4. Pavment of Anv Supplemental Application Fees That Are Due 60._ _ This application is subject to an initial application fee of($35,224.00), which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the application review expenses exceed 100% of the initial fee. Any additional fee due must be paid within 60 days of the permit effective date or prior to use of the permit whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance plus five working days for file preparation. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. If additional fees are owed, a bill will be sent to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. Page 27 of 41 PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION 05-8938 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the County Ordinance Code. Any exceptions must be stipulated in these conditions of approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the revised Vesting Tentative Map received by the Community Development Department on September 7, 2006 and Stormwater Control Plan received on October 4, 2006 (dated September 29, 2006). COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP. General Requirements: 61. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the Ordinance Code, this subdivision shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 9). Any exceptions therefrom mustbe specifically listed in this conditional approval statement. The drainage, road and utility improvements outlined below shall require the review and approval of the Public Works-Department and are based on the Vesting Tentative Map received by the Community Development.Department on September 7, 2006 and Stormwater Control Plan received on October 4, 2006. 62. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted 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. These plans shall include any necessary traffic signage and striping plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division. Roadway Improvements (Pittsburg Avenue Frontage): 63. Applicant shall construct curb, 5-foot sidewalk (width measured from curb face to back of walk), necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage, pavement widening, transitions, curb ramps, and street lighting along the frontage of Pittsburg Avenue. The applicant shall construct face of curb 10 .feet from the ultimate right of way line. Pavement widening and transitions shall provide for a .minimum 82-foot wide road width (or wider if a dual left turn lane is required at the intersection of Pittsburg Avenue and Richmond Parkway) with left turn channelization and landscaped medians. The 82-foot wide roadway shall include, at a minimum, a 14-foot landscaped median, one 14-foot wide inside travel lane in each direction (adjacent to the median), one 12-foot wide travel lane in each direction, and two 8-foot wide shoulders. A minimum 1246ot wide left-turn pocket shall be provided for westbound left-turn movements onto Richmond Parkway and proposed Street B, as necessary. The applicant shall provide protected signal phasing on the westbound and eastbound approaches of Pittsburg Avenue at Richmond Parkway. (MM-XV.b.) Page 28 of 41 i 64. The applicant shall demo f=flat the storage lengths for each left-turn lane ,R nstrat proposed on ias shown on the vesting tentative map, is adequate PittsburggAven,-, _ per Caltrans standards for�peak conln n°urs and based on the ultimate build out'_o Taw siorage lengths are inadequate. the applicant srr t � -� redes.lallm date left-turn lanes on .�Qut that incorporates d� Pittsburg Avenue and/or r ddltional on-site— 'aaways or provide additional intersection spacing to meet minimum Caltrans standards. 65. Proposed Street-A shall be restric>,�d to right outbound and right inbound access - only. Street A shall have a mimmun.,,Koad width of 32 feet, with an 18 foot minimum inbound lane and a 14 foot mai-mum outbound lane. The applicant shall `provide Y sketch plan detailing the' --tricted movements from the intersection of proposed Street A and Pittsburg A�v.nue for the review and approval of the'Public Works Department. 66. Applicant shall construct minimum 44-foot wide project entrance/exits—for proposed Street B to accommodate a minimum 18-foot wide inbound lane and -two"outbound lanes. The outbound lanes shall consist of one minimum 12-foot wide right-turn lane to access eastbound Pittsburg Avenue and one 14-foot wide left=turn lane-Jo access westbound Pittsburg Avenue. Proposed Street B shall gradually transition-from a 44-foot width to a 36-foot width between the project entrance/exit and 'the northerly curb return of proposed Court Q. Parking and construction of any "bulb-outs" shall be prohibited along these sections. 67. Applicant shall construct a street-type connection with minimum 20-foot radii curb returns at all intersections within the project as well as at the proposed Street A and Street B entrances. - .68. .. Applicant.shall install pedestrian ramps at all curb returns within the pro ect and at the intersection of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburgh Avenue. Adequate right of way shall be dedicated at the curb returns along the project frontage of Pittsburgh Avenue to accommodate the returns and curb ramps. A detectable warning surface.(e.g. truncated domes) shall be installed as part of all curb ramp construction. 69. The applicant shall install safety related improvements on all streets (including traffic signs and striping) as approved by Public Works. Roadway Improvements (On-Site): 70. All internal roadways shall remain private. Applicant shall construct all on-site private roads and courts per the typical sections shown on Sheet C-8 of the vesting tentative map and in accordance with current County private road standards, subject to the review and approval of Public Works and the Fire Page 29 of 41 District. The applicant shall install safety related improvements on all internal streets (including traffic signs and striping) as approved by Public Works. 71. All sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with current County standards and shall have a minimum width of 4.5 feet. 72. Applicant shall-construct a turnaround at the end of proposed Courts A, B. C. D. E. F, G. Street F, and Street K if required, subject to the review and approval of the Fire District. 73. Applicant shall install appropriate signage at the terminus of proposed Street P indicating that the roadway will be extended in the future. The applicant shall also record a deed notification to inform future property owners of proposed buildings 5-8 that Street P will be extended in the future. Access to Adjoining Property: Proof of Access 74. Applicant shall furnish proof to Public Works of the acquisition of all necessary rights of way, rights of entry, permits and/or easements for the construction of off-site, temporary or permanent, public and private road and drainage improvements. Encroachment Permit 75. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the County's Application and Permit'Center for construction of driveways or other improvements within the right of way of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. Site Access 76. Applicant shall relinquish. abutter's rights of access along the Pittsburg Avenue frontage of this property, with the exception of the intersection of proposed Street A and Pittsburg Avenue and intersection of proposed Street B and Pittsburg Avenue, as approved by these conditions of approval. 77. Applicant shall relinquish abutter's rights of access along the Richmond Parkway frontage of this property, as approved by these conditions-of approval. Road Dedications: . 78. Applicant shall convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, 52 feet of right of way necessary for the planned width of 102 feet along the project frontage of Pittsburg Avenue. Additional right of way shall be dedicated to accommodate a of 41 Page 30 dual left turn lane at the intersection of Pittsburg Avenue and Richmond Parkway that may be required to facilitate traffic circulation. Sight Distance: 79. Applicant shall provide adequate sight distance at the intersection of. proposed Street A and Pittsburg Avenue and the intersection of proposed Street B and Pittsburg Avenue for a through traffic design speed of 45 miles per hour in accordance with Chapter 82-18 of the County Ordinance Code and County corner sight distance standards. Landscaping, walls, fences, signs, or any other obstructions must be placed to maintain adequate sight distance. 80. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue for a design speed of 60 miles per hour. Landscaping, walls, fences, signs, or other obstructions must be placed to maintain adequate sight distance. 81. Applicant shall provide adequate sight distance at all roadway intersections on- site for a through traffic design speed of 25 miles per hour in accordance with Chapter 82-18 of the County Ordinance Code and County corner sight distance standards. Landscaping, walls, fences, signs, or any other obstructions must be placed to-maintain adequate sight distance. Construction: 82. Applicant shall provide a pavement analysis for those roads along any proposed haul route or any alternate route(s) that are proposed to be utilized during hauling operations. This study shall analyze the existing pavement- conditions and determine what impact the hauling operation will have over the life of the project. The study shall provide recommendations to mitigate identified_ impacts. The applicant shall construct any recommended repairs and execute a bonded road improvement agreement to ensure the roadways are repaired adequately prior to filing of the Final Map. Maintenance of Facilities: 81 A homeowner's association (HOA) or other acceptable entity other than the County or the Flood Control. District shall be formed to insure maintenance of all common and open space areas,-private roadways, any private street lights, public and private landscaped areas, perimeter walls/fences, and on-site drainage facilities. Neither the County nor Flood Control District will accept these facilities for maintenance. 84. Applicant shall develop and enter into a maintenance and plan of operation agreement that will insure that all common and open space areas, private roadways, any private street lights, public and private landscaped areas, perimeter Page 31 of 41 walls/fences, and on-site drainage facilities will be maintained, for the review and approval of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. 85. Applicant shall record a Statement of Obligation, in the form of a deed notification, to inform all future property owners of their legal obligation and specific responsibilities to maintain all common and open-space areas, private roadways, any private street lights, public and private landscaped areas, perimeter walls/fences, and on-site drainage facilities. If any landscaping improvements are proposed within the public right of way; the applicant shall either; 1. Apply to Public Works for annexation to the County Landscaping District AD -1979-3 (LL-2) for the future maintenance of public landscaping and automatic irrigation facilities prior to filing of the Final Map This may entail formation of a new zone; OR 2. The Home Owners Association (HOA) created for this development shall enter into a license' agreement. with the County for the maintenance of any landscape improvements located within the public right of way. 86. Applicant shall apply to Public Works for amiexation to the Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2006-1 (North Richmond Area Maintenance Services) for the future maintenance of area wide medians and landscaping. The annexation of property into the CFD must be completed prior to filing of the Final Map and the applicant should be aware that the annexation process may take approximately 60 days. Pedestrian Facilities: 87. Applicant shall submit a pedestrian circulation plan to the Public Works Department for evaluation of pedestrian circulation and safety throughout the project. The circulation plan shall detail all sidewalks, pedestrian paths, and ramps that indicate all pedestrian paths of,travel and shall show where pedestrians may cross streets, preferably at the shortest distance available. The pedestrian circulation plan must be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to recordation of the Final Map. 88. Curb ramps shall be designed and constructed in accordance with current County standards. A detectable warning surface (e.(,. 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. 89. The applicant shall design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance. with Title 24 (Handicap Access) and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, driveway depressions, and curb ramps. Page 32 of 41 Parking: 90. Parkin- shall be prohibited on one side of any on-site private street where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and both sides of any on-site private street where the curb-to-curb width is less than 28 feet. "No Parking" signs and pavement markings shall be installed along these portions of the on-site roadway system, subject to the review and approval of Public Works. Underground Utilities: 91. Applicant shall underground all new and existing utility distribution facilities, including those along the project frontages of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. Street Lights: 92. Property owner shall apply for annexation to County Service Area L-100 Lighting District by submitting: a letter of request; a metes and bounds description; and, pay the current LAFCO fees, or apply for annexation to another street light financing mechanism approved by the Public Works Department. Annexation shall occur prior to Final Map. The applicant shall be aware that the process to annex to CSA L-100 must comply with State Proposition 218 requirements,' which state that the property owner must hold a special election-to approve the annexation. This process may take approximately 4-6 months to complete. Annexation into .a street light service area does not include the transfer of ownership and maintenance of street lighting on private roads. Noise Studies: 93. Any noise studies, which may be required, shall be based on ultimate road widenina and ultimate traffic under the general plan. The applicant shall install any sound walls (including footings), which may be required, outside of the public road right of way. Drainage Improvements: Collect and Convev 94. Applicant shall collect and convey all-storm water entering and/or originating on this property without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage facility, 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, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. Page 33 of 41 95. The DA 19A Hydrology Map was based on an assumed ultimate density of 7 du/acre at this location for ultimate build out, as opposed to the 14 du/acre proposed with this application. In order to determine the possible impacts to downstream facilities due to the higher volume of runoff generated by the increased density proposed, a hydrology study shall be submitted to Public Works and the Flood Control District for review and approval prior to recordation of the Final Map. (MM-VIII) 96. Applicant shall verify the adequacy of the detention/water quality basin and demonstrate that the existing downstream drairiage system(s) that receives storm water runoff from this project is adequate to convey the required design storm (based on the size and ultimate development density within the contributing watershed) to the satisfaction of Public Works, Engineering Services Division, and the Flood Control District. If necessary, the applicant shall construct improvements to guarantee adequacy and obtain the necessary rights to construct off-site drainage improvements. (MM-VIII) Detention Basin: 97. The detention/water quality basin shall be designed and constructed in conformance with Contra Costa County's "Detention Basin Guidelines" and shall be reviewed by the Flood Control District. All hydrologic calculations and hydraulic analysis shall conform to Flood Control District requirements. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 98. The applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the Ordinance Code and Public Works Design Standards. 99. Any surface or subsurface stone drain facility within the subdivision conveying runoff from private streets or more than one parcel shall be installed within a minimum 10-foot wide private storm drain easement. 1.00. Applicant shall prevent.storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. 101. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining over the existing levee into Wildcat Creek. 102. DA 19A has inadequate maintenance funding. The construction of this development should not result in added costs or reduction of revenue for the County or Flood Control District. As one of the mitigation measures for the adverse drainage impacts of this development, the applicant shall annex into a County Maintenance Benefit Assessment District (MBAD) to provide a perpetual funding source for maintenance of the regional drainage area facilities. The County is in the process of forming this MBAD. If this MBAD is formed prior to final approval of this development, then the applicant shall annex into the MBAD. Page 34 of 41 103. Applicant shall obtain a Flood Control Permit for all work done on Flood Control District property including, but not limited to, conform grading along Wildcat Creek, a major Flood Control Channel. Drainage Area Reimbursements: 104. Certain improvements required by the Conditions of Approval for this development or the County Subdivision Ordinance Code may be eligible for credit or reimbursement against the drainage area fee. The developer should contact the Flood Control District to personally determine the extent of any credit or reimbursement for which he may be eligible. Any credit or reimbursements shall be determined prior to filing the final map, as approved by the Flood Control District. Provision "C.3" of the NPDES Permit: 105. This project shall fully comply with the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, and the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). As part of these requirements, the applicant- shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to the maximum extent practicable into the design of this project, implement them and provide for perpetual operation and maintenance for all treatment BMPs. ° 106. A Stormwater Control Plan received on October 4, 2006 by the Public Works Department was reviewed and determined to be preliminarily complete. Although the Stormwater Control Plan has been determined to be preliminarily complete, it is subject to revision during the preparation of improvement plans, as necessary to bring it into full compliance with C.3 stormwater requirements. The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department a final approved Storrnwater Control Plan that has been certified and stamped by a licensed, professional Civil Engineer, Architect, or Landscape Architect. (MM VIII) 107. All construction plans (including but not limited to: site, improvement, structural, mechanical, architectural, building, grading and landscaping plans) shall comply with the preliminarily approved Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) or any subsequently revised SWCP, the County's Stormwater Management and Discharcle Control Ordinance, the "Stormwater C.3 Guidebook" and the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. All construction plans shall include details and specifications necessary to implement all measures of the SWCP; subject to the review and approval of the County. To insure conformance with the SWCP, the applicant shall submit a completed "Construction Plan C.3 Checklist" indicating the location on the construction plans of all elements of the SWCP as described in the "Stormwater C.3 Guidebook." Page 35 of 41 108. Applicant shall ensure that the proposed water quality basin is desi_aned to sufficiently detain the necessary volume of water to achieve "maximum extent practicable" pollutant removal, including fine sediment and particulate matter, prior to discharge to a storm drain system. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed water quality basin will adequately remove pollutants through settlement" due to the presence of impermeable soils, as. opposed to direct or indirect infiltration to groundwater, to the extent required-:by Provision C.3 of the NPDES Permit, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, and the requirements of the RWQCB. The necessary volume of water shall be detained for the minimum "drawdown time" required by the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, Chapter 5. The water quality volume of the proposed basin shall be determined using acceptable Methods (i.e. WEF method or California BMP method) specified under the RWQCB permit. If the proposed water quality basin is not capable of meeting the minimum specified standards through "settlement" or direct infiltration, the applicant shall provide alternative treatment BMPs/IMPS throughout the site. utilizing indirect infiltration to meet the minimum standards set forth in Provision C.3 of the NPDES Permit, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, and the requirements of the RWQCB. 169. Any non-self-retaining pervious/landscaped areas within the project shall be factored into Table 2 of the Treatment BMP Sizing Worksheet, based on the appropriate runoff factor, to deterniine the required size of each treatment BMP/IMP. 110. All water quality features shall be located within public utility easements to allow County access for any future inspection and/or maintenance purposes. 111. Any water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer then 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. 1.12. Prior to building permit final and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plan and execute any agreements identified in the SWCP, which pertain to, the trarisfer of ownership and/or Iona-term maintenance of storm water treatment or hydrograph modification BMPs/IMPS. 113. Applicant shall provide cost estimates for the complete financing and perpetual maintenance of the water quality features proposed with this application for the review and approval of the Public Works Department. This estimate shall include all long term costs associated with these water quality features including, but not limited to, Operation and Maintenance, financing, inflation indexing, and replacement costs. 114. Applicant shall cooperate fully in the formation of financing mechanisms (e.('. Benefit Assessment District) to insure that all costs associated with the perpetual Page 36 of 41 Operation & Maintenance, administration and reporting of these water quality features (including costs associated with all required County administration and reporting) are paid for by the property owners that are or will be benefiting from this development. 115. Applicant shall grant "development rights" to the County, by grant deed, over proposed Lot F to prevent construction of any impervious surfaces that may generate polluted runoff and adversely impact downstream storm drain systems and/or natural watercourses. All treatment BMPs/IMPs constructed within each Phase of the proposed subdivision shall be sized per C.3 requirements to treat, at a minimum, all storm water runoff generated by each Phase. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan: 117. Prior to ground disturbance, the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to mitigate construction related impacts and submit it to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP shall be kept on-site at all times and shall be amended whenever there is a change in construction or operations which may affect the discharge of significant quantities of pollutants to surface waters, ground waters, or a municipal separate storm sewer system. (NIM- VIII) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES): 118. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) for municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay Region or Central Valley Region). Compliance will include .developing, long-term best management practices (BMP's) for the reduction or elimination of storm water pollutants. The project design shall incorporate some or all of the following long term BMP's in accordance with the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program for the site's storm water drainage. - Stencil advisory warnings on all catch basins. - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Slope-pavements to direct runoff to landscaped/pervious areas, where feasible. - Shallow roadside and on-site swales. - Provide educational materials regarding the Clean Water Program to new homebuyers. - Prohibit or discourage direct connection of roof and area drains to storm drain systems. Page 37 of 41 Other alternatives, equivalent to the above. as approved by the Public Works Department. Pai2e 38 of 41 ADVISORY NOTES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. IT IS PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES TO WHICH THIS PROJECT MAY BE SUBJECT. A. NOTICE OF 90-DAY OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, DEDICATIONS, . RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. This notice is intended to advise the applicant that pursuant to Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations, and/or exactions required as part of this project approval. The opportunity to protest is limited to a 90-day period after the project is approved. The ninety (90) day period in which you may protest the amount of any fee or the imposition of any dedication, reservation, or other exaction required' by this approved permit, begins on the date this permit was approved. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 and delivered to the Community Development Department within 90 days of the approval date.of this permit. B. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) for municipal construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay or Central Valley Region). C ComplywLtl the requirements of theWestCantra Costa Wastewater Distract" D. Comply with the requirements of the EBMUD. E. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa Consolidated Fire Protection District. F. Comply with the requirements of the County Office of the Sheriff. G. Comply with the requirements of the Building Inspection Department. Permits are required prior to grading and construction. H. The project is subject to the development fees in effect as of April 10, 2006, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Community Development Department. These fees are in addition to any other development fees which may be specified in the condition of approval. Page 39 of 41 The fees include but are not limited to the following: Park Dedication $7.235 per residence An estimate of the fee charges for each approved lot may be obtained by contacting the Building Inspection Department at 335-1196. L Police Service District Costs and Necessary Processing Time—The applicant is advised that the tax for the police services district is-currently set by the Board of Supervisors at $200 per parcel annually (with appropriate future Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments). The annual fee is subject to modification by the Board of Supervisors in the future. The current fee for holding the election is $800 and is also subject to modification in the future. The applicable tax and fee amounts will be those established by the Board at the time of voting. The applicant is advised that the election process takes firom 3 to 4 months and must be completed prior to recording the Final Map. J. Vesting Tentative Map Rights—The approval of this vesting tentative map confers a vested right to proceed with development in substantial compliance with ordinances, policies, and standards in effect as of April 10, 2006, the date the vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Community Development Department. The vested rights also apply to development fees, which the County has adopted by ordinance. These fees are in addition to any other development fees, which may be specified in the conditions of approval. K. Comply with the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance requirements for the North Richmond Area of Benefit and WCCTAC (STMP) Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. These fees must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. L. Comply with the Drainage Fee Ordinance requirements for Drainage Area 19A as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This fee must be paid prior to filing the Final Map. M. If it is found that the preliminarily approved SWCP is incomplete, inadequate, or not in full compliance with the "C.3" regulations subsequent to the-public hearing, it will need to be revised to bring it into full compliance. Revision of the SWCP may result in a substantial change to the County approval and the project may be subject to additional public hearings. Revisions to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents may also be required. This may .significantly increase the time and applicant's costs associated with approval of the application. N. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Game. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction Page 40 of 41 within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Game Code. O. 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 deternline if a permit is required, and if it can be obtained. P:• Applicant shall comply with County Child Care Ordinance. (Ch. 82-22). The applicant is advised to begin the compliance process at least six months prior to tr recording the Final Map in order to allow sufficient time for the study's preparation and review. Q. Applicant to comply with the County Water Conservation Ordinance. (Ch 82-26) G:\Advance Planning`adv-plan\General Plan Amendments\gp04-0008NovePropGPA\SD058938DP053024.coa.02.I±.07.BOS.doc Page 41 of 41 EXHIBIT 4 January 9, 2007 Staff Report and Recommendation to County Planning Commission (including the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, SCH#20061021069 prepared for the Nove Property Residential Project in accordance with CEQA) ALTenda Item = _ L Community Development Department Contra Costa CountV CONTRA COSTA.COUNTY-PLANNING COMMISSION �': JANUARY' 9. 2007 TUFSDA NOTE PROPER TJ' I. INTRODUCTION Signature Properties, (Applicant) -Nove Investments (Owner) This project consists of the following related applications: A. General Plan Amendment. County File#GP040008: -- An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General (2005-2020) Plan re-designating two.pareels that total 29.2 acres from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple Family Residential -Medium Density. $. Maior Subdivision, County File #SD058938: -- A request for approval to subdivide 29.2 acres into 370 residential lots. The lots ran(2e in size from 2,080 square feet minimum to 4,930 square feet maximum. C. Development Plan, Countv File #DP053024: - A request for approval for a preliminary and final development plan to establish 370 residential units, 'of which 15% will be affordable units. The total 370 units are divided into three housing types: 120 - 2 story townhomes; 110 - 2 story cluster homes; and -140 condominiums (both l and 2 stones). Conditions of Approval permit delivery of affordable units on or off site, but within unincorporated North Richmond. A .proposed parking plan that contains two parking spaces per unit and includes 142 on site guest parking spaces. A total of 6.7 acres of open space/park ares is Proposed. D. The project also includes an annexation into the West County Wastewafer District _ for sanitary sewer service, and the Niello-Roos Public Works Maintenance Service Community Facilities District. The subject property's address is 500 Pittsburn Avenue in the North Ric'nmond area. The project is located on the east side of the Richmond Parkway between Pittsburg Avenue and Wildcat Creel_. (Zoning: P-1) (Zoning Atlas: 3-4) (Census Tract: 3650.02) (Assessor Parcel Numbers: 408-170-072 L, 408-180-010'). II. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion: A. That on the basis of the record before it, including the Mitigated Negative Declaration/lnitial Study prepared for the applicati-ons submitted for this project (County File #'s GP04-0008/ 'SD05898/ DP053024) and comments submitted, the County Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project with proposed mitigation measures will have a significant effect on the .environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis. The documents or other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the County Planninm g Commissions decision is based may be found at the Communin Development Department, 651 Pine Street, 2nd Floor, North Wing, Martinez, CA. under the custody of the project planner, David Brockbank (925) 335-723 7, B._Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project covering associated County File #'s GP04-0008/ SD05898/ DPO53024 for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program. C. Adopt the findings and approve the proposed Preliminary and Final Development Plan with conditions, as described in this report. D. Adopt the findings and approve the proposed Vesting Tentative Map with conditions, as described in this report. E. Recommend to the. Board of Supervisors adoption of the proposed General Plan Amendment, County File# GP04-0008, to re-designate the subject property from Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density (MM). III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The General Plan designation for the Nove property is Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI). An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020) re-designating two parcels (APN #408-170- 072 and #409-18(�-010) totaling 29.2 acres, from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multi Family Residential — Medium Density is being considered concurrently with the approval of the Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Map. The current and proposed General Plan land use designation maps for the subject site are attached to this report as Exhibits 3 and 4, respectively. B. Zoning: Planned Unit Development T-1.) District for North Richmond (Exhibit 5). S-� C. CEOA: In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) an initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration coveri L, app Iications for the project, which includes Count\ File -'s GP(4-0008% SD0-5898.' DP053024, was prepared by the Community Development Department and posted at the County Clerk's Office on October 23, 2006 and concurrently mailed to tha owner: of adjoining properties. The public comment period extended to November 21, 2006. For a more complete discussion on the.CEQA review see Section IA. D. Regulatory Programs: 1. Flood Zone: The majority of the site is located .within Flood Zone C of minimal flooding —Panel #230B. There is a.portion at the southern end of the subject site that lies within Flood Zone A — one hundred year flood zone. -'here is no development proposed within Flood Zone A. 2. Active Fault Zone: The subject property is not located within the Alquist —Priolo earthquake fault zone. 3. 60dBA Noise Control: The subject property is located within the 50dBA noise control zone. The sources of noise in the project vicinity include traffic along the -Richmond Parkway. N. SITE DESCRIPTION The Nove property is located in the unincorporated area of North Richmond in Contra Costa County.bounded by the Richmond Parkway on the west, Pittsburg Avenue on the north,:and Wildcat Creek on the-south. The subject site consists of 29.2 acres comprised of Assessor Parcel Numbers 408-170=072 and 408-180-010. Parcel maps of these properties are attached-under Exhibit 1. The Nove property has been used as part of a flowergrowing and staging operation by Color Spot, lnc. The property has been leased from Nove Investments to Color Spot; Inc. It is..predominantly occupied by a combination of greenhouses and flower growing areas that contain plastic plant flats. The greenhouse areas are laid out in rectangular plots, with relatively wide, gravel covered roads between them. Several one-story, wood- framed buildings are located near the center of the site. An aerial photograph of the subject site is provided under Exhibit 2. Topographically the property is a relatively flat area with a slight, though gentle slope from east to west. It contains clave}, native soils and has a high groundwater table. Existing drainage on the property is over land and drains to an existing ditch along the westerly boundary that discharges to an existing 48 inch storm drain in Pitts'Durg Avenue, which itself drains in westerly direction crossing Richmond Parkway. S-� N/. AREA DESCRIPTION Land uses of various properties near theproject site consist of an East $av Municipal Utilities District Water Reclamation Facility, various recycling, and auto dismantling operations, floncultural growing and distribution operations, and the West County Waste Authority Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. The adjacent properties consist of the following: North: Pittsburg Avenue comprises mainly of recycling.operations East: The West County Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. South: Wildcat Creek West: Richmond Parkway V1. PROPOSED PROJECT The applicant is proposing to develop a 370. residential unit subdivision consisting of three housing types: 120 two story townhomes, 140 condominiums,* and 110 cluster homes on approximately 292 acres of land located at 500 Pittsburg Avenue (Hove property) .in the North .Richmond area. This area is within the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area, which was formed in 1987 and the project site itself is also located within the North Richmond Shoreline Specific Plan area. Although the County General Plan currently designates this area as Heavy Industry and Light Industry, the applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment to re-designate the site to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density in support of their development proposal. The project also includes provision for approximately 6.4 acres of park/open space area. The project features two access points on Pittsburg Avenue and clusters of homes with private courts. Affordable Housing: The project proposal includes an affordable component in which not less than 56 units of housing will be affordable to moderate, low and very love income households. Due to the subject property being within the boundaries of the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency (Agency) has determined that it is subject to the California Redevelopment Law (CRL) affordable housin.production requirements set forth in Section 33413(b)(2) of the California Health and Safety Code. The CRL requires redevelopment agencies to provide affordable housing for very-low, lower, and moderate households at affordable costs. Qualifying household's income limits include Very-Low Income: At or below 50 percent, area median income (AMI). Lower-Income: Between 51 and 80 percent AMI. Moderate Income: Between 81 and 120 percent AMI. S-4 Redevelopment agencies must record covenants regarding long term afford aoiIII*ty for a period. not less than 45 years for below market rate (for-sale) units and 55 ",ears for rental units [Section 33413(b)(2)]. The CRL inclusionary housing obligation permits affordable units to be delivered on-site or off-site. Conditions.of approval have been prepared which permit an on-site program, an off-site program, or a combination of the two programs. A minimum of fifteen percent (1500), of the new units are subject to affordability covenants. Not less than forty percent (4000) of the affordable units (six percent of the total units in the pro) ect) must be, affordable to very-low income households. Up to sixty percent (60°io) of th e affordable units (nine percent of the total units in the pro)ect} may be affordable to low and moderate income households. VIL PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECTS A.. LP#2044-74 on APN #'s 408-170-072 and 408-180-010 — This Land Use Permit was approved for a flower crowing operations, , B. LL*-94: Lot Line Adjustment between APN #s 408-170-069 and 408-180-008. a VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS A. Health Services Department- Environmental Health: Memorandum dated April 8, 2005. No comments. B. California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS): Letter dated April 13, 2005. The proposed project area has the possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). Therefore,. no further study for archaeological resources is recommended. Review for possible historic structures was limited to the Northeast Information Center documents and should not be considered comprehensive. Since the. Office of Historic Preservation has determined that any building or structure 45 years or older may be of historic value, if the project area contains such properties it is recommended that they be evaluated by an architectural historian prior to commencement of project activities. The guidelines for implementation of California Register of Historical Re sources (Cal Register) criteria for evaluation of historical properties have been developed by the State Office of Historical Preservation. For the purposes of CEQA. all identified sites should be evaluated using the Cal Register criteria. CHRIS recommends the applicant contact the local Native American tribes) regarding traditional, cultural and rchaious values. S-5 A Cultural Resources Survey of the Nove property was prepared by the LSA in 2005. The study identified no cultural resources within or adjacent to the project location. C. California Department of.Fish and Game (CDFG): Letter dated April 11 2005. A complete assessment of the flora and fauna within and adjacent to the project area. with particular emphasis upon identifying endangered, threatened. and locally unique species and sensitive habitats, should be provided. Rare, threatened and endangered species to be addressed should include all those which meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) definition (see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380). The assessment should identify any rare plants and rare natural communities, following CDFG's Guidelines for Assessing the Effects of Proposed Pro j ects on Rare, Threatened and Endangered Plants and Natural Communities (revised May 8, 2000). D. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD): Letter dated.April. 12, 2005. EBMUD made the following comments: A main extension. at the project sponsor's expense; will be required to serve the proposed development. Off-site pipeline improvements, <also at the project sponsor's expense, may be required depending on domestic water demands and fire flow requirements set by the local:fire.department. Off-site pipeline improvements.include;but are not limited to„replacement of existing pipelines to the . . project site. 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, off-site pipeline improvements, and services requires substantial lead time, which should be provided for in the project sponsor's development schedule. Due to EBMUD's limited water supply. all customers should plan for shortages in time of drought. E. Public Works Department/Engineering Services: A series of memoranda were submitted in 2005 and 2006. Public Works comments have been incorporated into the staff report and conditions of approval. F. Building Inspection D-c-Dartment/Grading Division: Memorandum dated April 19.. 2005. No grading shown at this time..,..-Geotechnical Investigation Report required. NPDES requirements required for grading permit. G. Contra Costa Countv Fire Protection District: Memorandum dated April l5. and 2005. See attachment. Additional comments on the tentative map revision were received on September 1, 2005. The Fire District reviewed the revisions with the developer. The applicant revised hydrant locations. Access is approved and water supply requirements are the same. H. West Countv Wastewater District: Letter dated .lune 23. 2005. See letter under Exhibit 6: Agency Comments. The "Advisory Notes” section.of the proposed permit explains that the applicant must comply with the requirements of the 'West Contra Costa Wastewater District. S-6 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEOA) An initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for tills project in accordance with therequirements of CEQA. The Initial Stud- amid proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration were posted on October 23, 2006 witli the public comment period running through to November 21, 2006. A copy oz the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is provided under Exhibit 7: Initial Study attached to this report. Several interested parties submitted comments to the County r`garding the Initial Study. These letters together with the County's response to these letters are provided under Exhibit S. The following is a summary of potentially significant impacts identified in the Initial Study, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), detailing the mitigation measures is attached under Exhibit 9. A. AESTHETICS Potential aesthetic impacts are related to development of a residential neighborhood on a site currently used for a flower growing operation. This would be a change in the visual character or quality of;the area by changing- the view from the Richmond Parkway from an industrial-agricultural setting to more residential urban setting. Although the change would not have significant adverse impact, the project does include a 12 foot tall soundwall that could have an impact. As such; the mitigation for potential aesthetic impact calls for landscape plan for a"portion of the project fronting Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. For a detailed discussion of aesthetic impacts and Proposed mitigations s ee page 7 to S in the Initial Study. B. AIR QUALITY A portion of the project is located adjacent to Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg, Avenue, which carries truck traffic that emit diesel particulate matter. h 199&, the California Air Resources Board identified diesel particulate matter as a known carcinogen. Further studies initiated by this decision found that diesel particulate matter accounts for much of the adverse health risk in ambient air of urban environments. In 2000-2001, the California Air Resources Board developed methods to evaluate exposures from traffic. In 2005, the California Air Resources Board issued guidelines for locating new sensitive receptors, such as residential development, near sources of air pollution from freeways or transportation corridors (e.g. rail lines). Exposure of proposed new residences to diesel particulate matter emissions was evaluated as part of the project's air quality study. The analysis looked at the impacts of.diesel particulate matter from trucks using the Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue intersection. Trucks accelerating at this intersection (due to the stop light) would result in high-localized emissions of diesel particulate matter causing a potentially significant health risk for any new homes near the northwest corner of the project. The air quality analysis identified the portion of the site, through dispersion modeling, where h--alth asks based on 30-year and 70-wear S-7 exT)osures would be significant. Significance for this impact is defined as the risk of contracting cancer over lifetime exposure that equals or exceeds 10 in one million. The applicant redesigned the protect in response to the stud}; findingrs to avoid locating new homes where this significant impact would.occur. With the redesigned plans, expected health risks for all proposed residences would be less than 10 in one million chances, which is less than significant. The significance criteria are based on guidance from Bay Area Air Quality Management District and California Air Resources Board. For a detailed discussion of air quality impacts and proposed mitigations see page 10 to 20 in the Initial Study. C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES An arborist report and a biological reconnaissance survey were prepared for the Nove property by LSA in 2005 and 2006, respectively. These reports determined that the property contains no habitat for any rare, threatened, or endangered plants or animals. In regards to sensitive habitats, LSA reports determined that no substantial , interference with the movement of wildlife will be -causedby the proposed development. Nor will it.impede the use of.any wildlife nurseries; or result in a substantial loss of wildlife habitat. . Bordering along the southern portion of the Nove property is the Wildcat Creek corridor. The creek corridor supports the only native habitat in the vicinity of the site. The north bank of the creek, which is directly adjacent to the site, is maintained for flood control purposes. The proposed project would be consistent with the relevant policies in the General Plan and would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Furthermore, the Nove property contains no areas subject to the jurisdiction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 Clean Water Act), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section 401 Clean Water Act or Porter- Cologne), or California Department of Fish and Game (Section 1600 Fish and Game Code). The tree survey prepared by counted 187 trees on the perimeter of the N ove Property. There are no trees within the interior of the property. Of the 187 trees surveyed; 121 are outside the project boundary. All the trees along Pittsburg Avenue are within the project boundary. The report identified two large specimen trees located west of the entrance gate. One of the trees is a red willow and the other is a blue gum eucalyptus. The applicant is proposing to remove a total of 64 trees which include 5 Monterey pines, 53 eucalyptus, 2 coast live oak, and 4 red willow. The applicant has provided a .landscape plan that will replenish the lost vegetation. A complete discussion on biological resources can be found at pages 21 to the Initial Study. S-S D. CULTURAL RESOURCES The location is sensitive for prehistoric archeological sites and monitorin 2 during the. around disturbing activities has been recommended. Conditions of Approval nave been attached to the staff report. A complete discussion on cultural resources can be found at paces 24 -to 25 in the Initial Study. E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potential impacts involving geology and soils are related.to the possibility of liquefaction, ground failure, and soil expansion. The applicant submitted geotechnical studies prepared by ENGEO, Inc. in 2005, which were subsequently peer reviewed by the County's Consulting Geologist, Darwin Myers. The ENGEO conclusions and recommendations can be summarized as follows: • Groundwater. The water table is I to 6.feet below the surface. • , Liquefaction. ENGEO considers the sands to be liquefiable and recommends measures to-mitigate liquefaction in the northwest portion of the site.. Basin Deposits. The weak and highly:compressible siltyclays are subject to L to 14-inches-of "primary" settlement due to the civil grading needed to elevate*the project out of the floodplain and estimated residential building loads, causing _ damage to improvements. Secondary consolidation may begin at the end of the primary consolidation phase, and amount to 114 to finch over a 3D to 50 vear period. To minimize after-construction settlement.. ENGEO recommends a surcharge program consisting of fill placement (probably in combination with vertical wicl` drains). Placing temporary surcharge fills on the site is intended to result in a portion of the total settlement occurring before building, construction and will minimize the after-construction settlement. Specific criteria are provided for the thickness of the surcharge fill and anticipated settlement as a function of the thickness of the soft clays. ■ Additional Recommendations. ENGEO provides specific standards and criteria for use in design and construction of the project (site grading, drainage and foundation design). A detailed discussion of geology and soils can be found on pages 26 to 30 in the Initial Study. � q F. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS WASTE. The Nove property is not on any list of hazardous materials sites. However, there are underground storage tanks (UST's) on the site. Treadwell L Rollo has completed the planned Phase II ESA for the site. Since the property has been used as a flower growing and staging operation for many years, many common types of activities associated with this use are residual concentrations of pesticides., herbicides, and petroleum hydrocarbons in the shallow soil and/or groundwater was a concern. Treadwell & Rollo's investigation detected minor concentrations of several of these organic compounds in the soil and shallow groundwater. The applicant will be conditioned to provide evidence that prior to development that all the UST's have been closed, and no further analysis is required. A detailed discussion on hazards and hazardous waste can be found on pages 31 to 33 in the Initial Study. G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potential"-impacts involving water quality, alteration of drainage courses or increase runoff, and increased impervious surfaces were evaluated. Required mitigation measures, include a Stormwater Control Plan prepared to the specifications of the Courity's Stormwater Management and.Discharge Ordinance, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook criteria, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board's requirements. Although Wildcat Creek is located within a 100-year flood zone, this flood zone does not extend on to the Nove Property and the site will be raised between 3.5 and l foot. Additionally, because this section of Wildcat Creek is improved and can contain a 100 year flood, the County's creek setback requirements do not apply to the Nove property. A detailed discussion of potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality and associated mitigation measures can be found on pages 34 to 39 in the Initial Study. H. NOISE Potential impacts involving noise relate to exposing residential units in the project site to exterior noise levels exceeding the "normally acceptable", noise and land use compatibility standards described in the Noise Element to the General Plan for single and family residential land uses. Interior noise levels would exceed acceptable levels at portions of the prof ect site without the incorporation of noise-insulation features into the project design. The .mitigation measure for the'exterior noise levels would involve construction of a 12 foot soundwall or noise barrier to achieve acceptable noise exposure to 60 DNL for the single family units and 65 DNL for the multi- family units. The mitigation for interior noise would require incorporation of sound insulation treatments in the building design including but not limited to sound rated windows, doors, exterior wall assemblies, acoustical caulking, etc. SpecI- S-10 determination of sound insulation treatments for interior noise exposurc- will be determined prior to issuance of building permits. A detailed discussion on potential noise impacts and mitigation measures can be found on pages 4) to 48 in the Initial Study. I. RECREATION The Initial Study determined that the project would not have an impact on existinn neiahborhood or regional park facilities or result in substantial deterioration of those facilities. However, an organization named Trails for Richmond Action Committee (TRAC) submitted a comment in August 2003 about the project's potential impact on nearby trails. As stated in the letter, the proposed project is located immediately adjacent to the. East Bay Regional Park District's Wildcat Creek Re s:ylional Trail, which connects with the completed San Francisco Bay Trail on the west side of the Richmond Parkway. TRAC believes the proposed residential development on the Nove Property would increase trail usage and overburden the trail system_ TRAC also asserts that the Wildcat Creek Trail west toward the Richmond ParkwaN- is unusable during the periods of heavy rain in the winter and spring due flooding and siltation from Wildcat Creek. They believe.this condition creates a traffic safety hazard causing trail users to cross Richmond Parkway, and they request a mitigation measure that requires the applicant to participate funding of a new trail overcrc>ssing of the Wildcat Creek Trail over Richmond Parkway. The County is not aware of any accidents or incidents associated with trail users illegally crossing Richmond Parkway and the TRAC comment did not provide evidence to substantiate the safety hazard claim. It is noted that the applicant has indicated to the East Bay Regional Park District their willingness to participate in a park district sponsored feasibility study to identify potential remedies for the occurrence of seasonal flooding on the Wildcat Creek .Trail were it crosses the Richmond Parkway. X. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSIDERATIONS The Public Works Department reviewed the revised Vesting Tentative Map received by the Community Development Department on September 7. 2006 and Stormwater Control Plan received on October 4, 2006 (dated September 29, 2006) and submitted .the following for this report: Traffic and Circulation: Pittsburg Avenue has a current road width of approximately 24 to 28 feet within a 40-foot right of way. Pittsbun-, Avenue is considered an arterial with an ultimate planned road width of S2 feet within a 102-foot wide nQht of way. This ultimate road width is based on the amount of traffic anticipated at the intersection of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue as the area develops over time. The applicant shall dedicate 52 feel of additional S-1 right of way along the project frontage of Pittsburg Avenue. The applicant shall construct curb, -foot sidewalk (width measured from curb face to bacl; of wall,:'). necessary° longitudinal and transverse drainage. pavement widening. transitions. and street lighting along the frontage of Pittsburg Avenue. The applicant shall construct face of curb 10 feet from thee ultimate richt of wav line. Pavement widening and transitions shall provide for an 82-foot road width with left turn channelization and landscaped medians. The 82 foot wide roadway includes one 14-foot wide inside travel lane in each direction (adjacent to the median), one 12-foot wide travel lane in each direction, a 14-foot wide landscaped median, and two 8-foot wide shoulders. A minimum 12-foot wide left-tum pocket shall be provided for westbound left-turn movements onto Richmond Parkway, proposed Street A, and proposed Street B. The applicant shall provide protected signal phasing on the westbound and eastbound approaches of Pittsburg Avenue at Richmond P ark-way. The subject parcel also fronts on Richmond Parkway, a 4-lane divided arterial recently accepted for maintenance by the County. Dedication of additional right of way is not required along this frontage. There is curb, gutter, street lights, and a wide roadside swale currently in place along the project frontage of Richmond Parkway. Additional improvements are not required Ialong Richmond Parkway. All on-site internal .roadways are proposed to remain private. The applicant shall construct all on-site private roads and courts per the typical sections shown on Sheet C-8 of the vesting tentative map in accordance with current County private road standards, ' . subject to the review and approval of Public Works and the Fire District. The applicant shall construct minimum 44-foot wide project entrance/exits for proposed Streets A and B to accommodate a minimum 18-foot wide inbound lane and two outbound lanes. The outbound lanes shall consist of one minimum 12-foot wide right- turn lane to access eastbound Pittsburg Avenue and one 14-foot wide left-turn lane.to access_westbound Pittsburg Avenue. Proposed Streets A and B shall gradual]), transition from a 44-foot width to a 36-foot width between the project entranceiexit and the northerly curb return of proposed Courts P and Q, respectively, parking and construction of any "bulb-outs", shall be prohibited along these sections. If Street A is restricted to a "right in, right out only" based on additional storage requirements for the left-turn lane(s) on Pittsburg Avenue and Richmond Parkway, the entrance width can be reduced to 32 feet in width (18 feet wide inbound lane and a 14 foot wide outbound lane,). Drainage: Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code requires all storm water entering andror originating on this property to be collected and conveyed without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage system, to an adequate natural watercourse having a definable bed and banks, or to an existing adequate public storm drainage system which conveys the storm waters to an adequate natural watercourse. The applicant proposes to collect storm water throughout the site via a system of inlets; storm drains, and gassy swales and convey the drainage to a proposed detentioniwater S-12 quality basin at the northwest corner of the. property. The intent of the propos ed detention basin is to allow pollutants to settle prior to entering, the existimi public storm drain systems at the northwest corner of the intersection of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg_ Avenue (Line C of Drainage Area 19A1. The DA 19A Hvorology Map of the area was based on an assumed ultimate density of i du/acre as opposed to the 13 duiacre proposed with this application. In order.to determine the possible impacts to downstream facilities due to the higher volume of runoff generated by the increased density proposed. a hydrology study shall be submitted to Public Works and the Flood Control District for review and approval prior to recordation of the Final Map. The applicant shall verify the adequacy of the detentioniwater qualit}l basin and demonstrate that -the existing, downstream drainage system(s) that receives storm water runoff from this project is adequate to convey the required design storm (based on the size axtd ultimate development densit}, within the contributing watershed) and, if necessary; construct improvements to guarantee adequacy. The applicant shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. The project site borders Wildcat Creek, a major Flood Control Channel owned and maintained by the Flood Control District. The applicant shall obtain a Flood Control Permit for any work, such as conform grading, done on District property. Stormwater Management: This project is required to .be in full compliance with the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance., the Stormwater "C.3" Guidebool: (available at www.cccleanwater.ora) and the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). A Stormwater Control Plan received on October 4, 2006 by the Public Works Department was reviewed and determined to be preliminarily complete. Although the Storrnwater Control Plan has been determined to be preliminaril}, complete, it remains subject to revision based on changes made during the preparation of improvement plans, as necessary, to better address compliance with C3 stormwater requirements. Revised maps reflecting the new preliminary Stormwater Control Plan is provided under Exhibit 11. The applicant shall ensure that the proposed water quality basin is designed to sufficiently detain the necessary volume of water to achieve "maximum extent practicable" pollutant removal, including fine sediment and particulate matter. prior to discharge to a storm drain system. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed water quality basin will adequately remove pollutants through "settlement" due to the presence of impermeable soils, as opposed to direct or indirect infiltration to groundwater, to the extent required by Provision C.3 of the NPDES Permit. the StOIn7water C.3 Guidebook, and the requirements. of the RWQCB. The necessary volume of water shall be detained for the minimum "drawdown time" required by the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook; Chapter 5. The water quality volume of the proposed basin shall be determined usinC7 acceptable methods (i.e. WEF method or California BMP method) specified under the RWQCB permit. If the proposed water quality basin is not capable of meeting the minimum specified standards through `settlement" or direct �_1 infiltration, the applicant shall provide alternative treatment BMPs/IMPS triroughoui the site, utilizing indirect infiltration to meet the minimum standards set forth in Provision C3 of the NPDES Permit. the Stormwaie: C., Guidebook. and the requirements of the RWQCB. X1. STAFF ANALYSIS /DISCUSSION A. General Plan Amendment : This General Plan Amendment would convert the 29- acre Nave property from industrial use to residential use and has been evaluated under the following considerations: • Impact On Demand for .Industrial Land In North Richmond Frorn Conversion To Residential Use • Appropriateness of New Residential Use In Predominantly Industrial Area and Potential Environmental Effects • Potential to Advance Goals and Policies of General Plan and North Richmond Redevelopment Plan 1. Impact On Demand for Industrial Land In North Richmond From Conversion To Residential Use: The General Plan has designated the Nove property as Heavy Industrial (HI) and Light Industrial (LI) for many years. The 29-acre property is part of approximately 500 acres of land in the North Richmond area between Wildcat Creek and Parr Boulevard mainly designated for industrial use. This nonresidential portion of North Richmond includes a range of uses generally falling under the light industrial, heavy industrial; and service commercial use types. Such uses reflect a long held .County policy to bring new jobs to North ` Richmond. An important, policy consideration with Signature Properties proposal to develop the Nove property for residential use is whether conversion would have negative consequences in meeting current and future demand for industrial space. What are the implications that this proposal would have on the County's long standing policy to reserve land area in North Richmond for employment based development? While many successful businesses thrive in this area.ofNorth Richmond and new ones have arrived, as a whole, the nonresidential portion of North Richmond could be characterized as significantlyunderutilized industrial land. Even though North Richmond is centrally located in the Bay Area, is linked by the Richmond Parkwav and railroad lines, and has relatively affordable land in large continuous tracts. these positive attributes have not been enough to induce significant industrial development. The limited success in attracting industrial development can be attributed to challenaes associated with poor infrastructure and negative community image, but a primary reason that so much land is underutilized is that the overall demand for industrial space in western Contra Costa County and the East Bav is diminishing. The Contra Costa Count), Redevelopment Agency recently commissioned a study prepared by Economic d:. Planning Systems (EPS), in conjunction with Berryman L Heniaar, to evaluate the infrastructure needs. S-14 costs, and financing options for industrial development within ttit� are?-. The purpose of this report was to provide a technical basis for the Redevelopment Aacncy to improve the areas infrastructure and help accelerate development and job opportunities. This study included a market analysis of the current and future demand for industrial space in North Richmond. A copy of the F_:PS report is provided under Exhibit 10 to this report. The key findings from the EPS report can be summarized as-follows: A. The existing northern, industrial portion of North Richmond area is currently underutilized. The active heavy and light industrial uses are scattered across the 500 acres and are often in the form of flower growing, storage, and recycling or salvage uses that do not typically generate high l--vel of jobs. There is also industrial land that is sitting vacant. B. The northern, industrial portion of North Richmond has some competitive advantages that could spur more industrial development but the underlying infrastructure needs to be improved to attract the type of development that would create job opportunities. C. The demand for residential land, as opposed to industrial land, is much greater. Young families and first-time homebuyers residing in West County are expected to drive demand for residential development. The location, demographics, and type of residential development suggests that the existing northern, industrial portion of North Richmond could serve a particular market niche for new residential construction aimed at families just entering the housing market. D. An analvsis of the industrial market indicates that North Richmond could capture up to 1.6 million square feet; or the equivalent of about 3 45 acres, of industrial development through year 2030. This compares to approximately 500 acres of available land now designated for industrial use. According to the analysis only about 29/o of the area of land now designated for industrial use is needed through the year 2030. The EPS report's findings provide substantial evidence that the conversion of 29 acres on the Nove property from industrial use to residential use, as proposed by Signature Properties, would not have negative consequences on the overall supply of land in North Richmond reserved for industrial use. There is at present more than adequate land read), and available in North Richmond to meet the current and future demand for industrial space over the next 25 years. AT)nropriateness of New Residential Use in Predominantly Industrial w ea: Another important land use consideration that this proposal raises is whether the change to residential use will create an incompatibility or conflict with nearby, S-15 existing industrial uses. The Nov-. prop--TTN' i:. bounded on two sides by active industrial uses: to tht east is the West CouniN7 Resource Recover Center. a solid waste transfer and recvclinL, facility•: and to the north along Pittsbura Avenue are various industrial uses primarily enaaaed in recycling metal products and drums. Would the conversion of the Nove property to residential use inevitable result in a conflict with these ongoing industrial operations' . Traditionally, industrial districts werecreated to separate noxious industrial uses from residential areas. Heavy industrial uses are distinguished by the smoke, odors, noise, vibration, glare, and traffic that are an inherent feature of their operations. Light industrial use districts typically include warehousing and light assembly plants, which.have little effect on surrounding uses other than truck traffic and visual impact. Industrial .use districts were created to protect industries from potential complaints from residential neighbors, and protect residents from the environmental effects of industrial uses. Most recently the vigorous enforcement of state and federal laws concerning air pollution and job safety, and the introduction of new air pollution/noise control technologies, have greatly reduced . the output' of smoke, odors, noise, and vibration associated with traditional "smokestack" industrial or manufacturing sites. An equally important change has been the growth of low-impact industries and of service and information industries leading to the development of the landscaped industrial park, which were commonly developed in the Bay Area during the 1970's and 1980's. The industrial pall: concept changed the approach to planning for industrial development, particularly in the Bay Area, by shifting the emphasis away from the large. .single use "smokestack" industrial or manufacturing plant to reserving contiguous tracts of land for a more diverse range of light manufacturing, assembling, and warehousing-uses. It was the prototypical industrial park development that the General Plan envisioned when the 500-acre area between Wildcat Creek and Parr Boulevard in North Richmond was designated for industrial use. It was-believed that this area would become attractive for industrial park development once regional access was improved via the construction of the Richmond Parkway. Since the completion of the Richmond Parkway, however. most of the recent industrial development in this area of North Richmond has been incremental and amounts to an accumulation of recvcling related (light-industrial) uses that do not generate much employment. Several flower growing, operations, predominantly Color Spot, have continued operations in North Richmond, but in the lona term it is their intention to phase out and relocate these operations outside the Bay Area. Aside from the recycling operations. there is little in the way of.actual manufacturing, fabrication, A firm that operates a drum recvclin(, or reconditioning* facility located across from the Nove Properr at the northwest corner of Pittsburg Avenue and Central has commented on the Initial Studv/Mitigated Negative Declaration in relation to potential conflict with their operations and the residential development proposed on the Nove propem'. See comment letter from Martin Lysons. attorney representing IMACC. and response to this comment under Exhibit 8: CEQA Response To Comments. S-16 or other industrial processes which would typically characterize an area set asidt for heavv industrv. and. as noted in the EPS report. the prospects fol- siC-nificani industrial expansion in the future are diminishing. The combination of reduced demand for industrial space, the nature and extent of existing industrial uses, and the overall improvements in air pollutiorvnoise control technologies, have made it more feasible to consider the appTopriateness of converting or recycling some of the underutilized industrial land in North Richmond to residential use. In communities where proposals to convert or recycle underutilized industrial land to residential use have been considered the focus has been on the environmental effects from nearby, existing industrial operations on new residential development. The environmental effects from the industrial uses, namely smoke, odors, noise, vibration, glare, and traffic, on nearby residential development have been controlled for through site layout and architectural design of the new residential units. This is the approach proposed for the ND-ve propmv. As more fully described in the site plan, and in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and the accompanying mitigation program, the lavout and design for the residential units on the Nove property would control for the effec-ts of nearest industrial properties by incorporating the following features: • 1? ft. tall soundwalls on two sides of the Nove property facing nearby industrial properties (north, and west) would be constructed, and special building construction techniques (e.g: sound-rated windows and building facade treatments) will be used to further mitigate noise to acceptable levels for a residential project: and, • There will be a significant buffer or setback of the residential units on tht Nove property from the existing industrial uses on three sides of the property, particularly to the north of the property along Pittsbury Avenue where there is a concentration of recycling uses. For example, there is approximately 335 feet between the closet residential units within the Nove property and the drum recvcling facility (IMACC) located on Pittsburg Avenue. This setback or buffer consists of 10 foot backyard. plus a 50 foot vegetated buffer/sound wall, plus a 75 foot street right-of- way for Pittsburg Avenue, and another 200 feet from the IMACC property line to the drum recycling facility. 3. Abilitv To Advance Goals and Policies of the General Plan and the North Richmond Redevc1onment Plan Taken as whole the General Plan encourages the recvcling or conversion of underutilized industrial land where,it can be demonstrated that a more productive or "higher and better" land use. such as residential development, would provide an opportunity for an appropriate infill development within an ufo anized area. S_17 Land Use Element Police 7:-S speaks most directly to this concept of innll development. it states that: "infilling of already developed area shall be encouraged. Proposals that would premature]\, extend development into area lacking requisite services, facilities and infrastructure shall be opposed. In accommodating new development, preference shall generally be given to vacant or under- used sites within urbanized area, which have necessary utilities installed with available remaining capacity, before undeveloped suburban lands are utilized.", The Nove property clearly meets the test of an infill development site since it is an underutilized industrial property located within an already urbanized area that has public services and utilities with remaining capacity. The proposed conversion of the Nove property from industrial use to residential use would advance the General Plan goals and policies related to infill residential development. Expanding housing opportunities are key goals of both the General Plan and the North Richmond Redevelopment Plan. Since the inception of the Redevelopment Plan in 1987 there have been concerted efforts by the Redevelopment Agency-to increase the quantity and improve the quality of housing in North Richmond by providing financial assistance in the development of affordable housing for very low, love, and moderate income households. Prior to the proposal by Signature Properties for the Nove property, there have been two major residential developments in North Richmond along the Richmond Parkway between Gertrude Avenue . and Wildcat Creek, Richmond Parkway Estates — 87 lot residential subdivision and Bella Vista — 173 lot residential subdivision. Neither of these residential developments required direct financial assistance from the Redevelopment Agency. Signature Properties proposal is a continuation of an emerging trend to develop housing in North Richmond along the Richmond Parkway without involving the direct financial assistance of the Redevelopment Agency, As proposed, this project would not only build new market rate units primarily aimed at the typical entry-level homebuyer in the West Count), area, but it also will participate in the Redevelopment.Agency's mandatory affordable housing program. The affordable housing program requires a minimum of 151x", of the 370 units be affordable (56 units) with not less than 40% of the affordable units to be affordable to very low income households (.6'//U.. or, 23 of the 370 units) and up to 60% of the affordable units (90/U.. or 33 of the 370 units) to be affordable, to low. and moderate income households. The Redevelopment Agency has determined that it will consider either -on-site and off-site options, or, a combination of both options, to meet the 15'/'L) affordable housing requirement. For more on the affordable housing requirement, see discussion on page S-4. and Conditions of Approval 934 through +39. If approved, this project would advance key housing production goals and objectives of both the General Plan and the S-1 S Redevelopment Plan by significantly expandin« and diversifvin�, the housing stock in North Richmond. 4 The proposal for residential development on the. Nove property also has the potential to significantly advance goals and policies in the General plan and the North Richmond Redevelopment Plan related to the provision o f parks and recreation facilities. North Richmond is generally under served in t-=s of pari: and recreational facilities, and there is a particularly need to provide more recreational opportunities for at-risk youth. The nearest playfield to the Nove property is located next to the Verde Elementary, School, which is approximately ,a 'i4 of mile to east of the Nove property. The ball field and the adjoining playground on the elementary school campus are effectively the only public recreational facilities that serve the unincorporated North Richmond community. Consequently, these facilities are heavily used and are in need of regular maintenance. The County's current park dedication (Quimby Act) fee for Vest County, including North Richmond, is set at 52000.00 per residential unit. Thi s fee has not been indexed to inflation and has not been updated since.1990. The payment of a park dedication fee per unit is in lieu of setting aside park land within a residential subdivision, and significantly, the fee can only be used by the Cottrity-for park acquisition or capital improvements. As in other unincorporated communities,the County depends on the proceeds from the park dedication fee collected from new development and other funding sources (both public and private grants) to upgrade and improve the existing park facilities in North Richmond_ There is no dedicated fund source for maintenance or to provide recreational programs. Recognizing the limitations in the County park fees program, th` Board has directed the Community Development and Public Works departments to prepare a study aimed at updating the part: dedication fees countywide to keep up with the using costs for acquiring and developing park facilities. This study is still in progress and is likely to result in a significant increase in the County's pari: dedication fees if approved by the Board of Supervisors. In recognition of the significant and unique park and recreation needs for the North Richmond community, Signature Properties has voluntarily agreed to pay a much higher park fee, including, a part: dedication (Quimby Act) fee at 52,000.00 per unit and to pay an additional park enhancement fee at S5.235.00per unit. This equates to a total payment of 52.676,950.00 in park fees from this one project, and, if approved, this project would provide an important public benefit by making a substantial funding contribution toward improvia 2 pari: and recreational facilities and programs in North Richmond. It is advised that the funds from the additional earl:enhancement fee portion from this proiect could be set up as annuin,fund to be used for parl: and recreational services. capital improvements. and/or maintenance in North Richmond. S-19 E. Site Plan Analysis. The applicant is proposing to subdivide 29.2 acres into ;70 residential units. three designated earl: sites, several additional open svace areas. and an internal private road system. The 370 residential units consist of three different housing types, which are divided into Townhomes, condominiums. and Cluster homes. Lot A is a park sited adiacent to Wildcat Creek, Lot B is a centralized park with a walking trail. and Lot F is partially a stormwater detention facility as well as park site that is proposed to have several playing fields. There are two access points to the development, both on Pittsburg Avenue. and the intemal private roads are mainly comprised of small courts. Further details regardin�c, the architectural designs, parks, roads, and parking are provided below. Architectural Design of the Nove Property Townhomes and Villa Condominiums The architecture style of the proposed Nove Property Townhomes and Villa Condominiums has Craftsman . style design elements. The desi-n includes articulated gable ends, decks and covered entries. The exterior materials are stucco with shingles and horizontal siding. Townhomes: The proposed townhomes will consist of 3 plans ranging in size from 1350 .square feet to 1667 square feet and from 2 bedroom 2 baths to 3 bedroom 2 baths. The units include 2 cargarages with tuck under parking, living area a level up, and bedrooms on.the second level. All units.have private enclosed patios in front. Buildings will consist.of 3 to 6 units per building arranged in a court vard or street frontage configuration. Open space is provided throughout the townhouse area for dog walking, relaxing and playing. Open space areas are overlooked by residential units to provide a sense of community and security. Streets within the townhouse area are private and designed to minimize traffic flow to the residents in that particular area. The Townhomes along the main circulation route face the street to provide a more residential fee] and activate the street. Condominiums: The Villa condominiums are attached Townhomes and flats with 2 car garages surrounding a motor court. They range in size from 1039 square feet to 1423 square feet and 2 bedrooms 2 bath to 3 bedroom 2 baths. Twenty of the flats are one story with direct garage access suitable for seniors. All of the homes have access to private open space either from a balcony or-private patio. Guest parlcing and trash pickup is provided on the streets outside of the,courtyards. The buildings are arranged around pedestrian-oriented open space drawing the buildings together in a meandering trail system. Architectural Design of the Nove Court Homes The architectural character of the Nove Court Homes is based on the regional "craftsman style" made popular in the Bay Area at the turn of the centum. Features include cross-gabled roofs, hipped roofs and decorative braces under 'gables. Exterior features include balconies and planters. S-20 Coun Homes: The Court homes consist of 4 plans ranging in size from 1.361 square feet to 2.139 square feet. The floor plans will have 3 bedrooms 2 baths to —'. 'bedrooms 2 baths and most with family rooms and formal dining. The cluster homes are gathered around a private court. Each home will have a priv ate vard and a 2 car garage. Each plan will have two elevations to provide varving architectural style. Parks/Open Space: The new neighborhood would include 6.4 acres of parks/open space area featuring a central park with a meandering trail, a larger park in the northwestern comer, and a meandering park adjacent to Wildcat Creek. The pari: next to Wildcat creek will provide the residents with access to the trail that runs along thecreek and ultimately to the Bay trial. These parks/open space areas will be maintained by the master homeowners association and will open to the public subject to hours .of operation. The community is designed to be a walkable community with ample opportunity for exercise and relaxation. Roads: There are two access points to the project site, both from Pittsburg Avenue, which then creates a central loop through the development. However, the intemal road system consists primarily of small courts (cul-de-sacs) for all o f the cluster housing. The roads within the development have been designed to mee-t the County standards for private roadways, as well as the requirements for the County Fire Protection District.. This road network will be privately maintained by the future Home Owners Association. -Parking: The County Code requires two off-street spaces per dwelling unit (for the single family and 2 bedroom multi-family units proposed in the project). The project would provide 740 off-street parking spaces, two for each dwelling unit. A total of 213 on-street (all on site) parking spaces are proposed. The County Code also requires 65 visitor parking spaces (0.25) spaces/multi-family unit. Therefore, as required for guest parking per code; a total of 6d parking spaces are being proposed. Of the 740 enclosed parking spaces. 80 are tandem and the remainder are side by side. C. Growth Management Considerations: The project has been reviewed iri the context of General Plan's Growth Management Element standards, including traffic, water, sewer, fire protection, police protection. parks and recreation, flood control and drainage. The project can meet all of these Growth Management standards, refer to findings on COAs. D. 65/35 Land Preservation Standard: The project has been reviewed in the. context of the 65/35 Land Preservation Standard as contained in the Land Use Element to the General Plan. The approval of the General Plan Amendment to re-designate the Nove property from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density would be inconseauential in terms of maintaining the land preservation standard. S-21 XIl. SUMJ\4AR)' CONCLUSION The proposed project substantially conforms to the goals and policies of the General Plan. Potentially significant environmental impacts can be mitigated through implementation of the attached Mitigation Monitorin^ Program. The General Plan Amendment would neither result in a violation of the 65/35 Land Preservation Standard, nor result in a violation of the Growth Management Standards. The Development Plan would conform to the standards of the P-1 District. The subdivision is consistent with the North Richmond P-1 Zoning District and the General Plan as it is proposed for amendment. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission adopt the. Mitigated Neeative Declaration, approve the Preliminary and Final Development Plan, approve the Subdivision along with the Conditions of Approval, and recommend the Board adopt the General Plan Amendment. Attachments: Exhibit I — Parcel Maps Exhibit 2 — Aerial Photographs Exhibit 3 — Existing General Plan Map Exhibit 4—Proposed General Plan Map Exhibit 5 — Zoninc District Map Exhibit 6 — Agency Comment Letters Exhibit 7 — Mitigated Negative Declaration (Initial Study) Exhibit 8 — CEQA Comment Letters and County Response to Comments Exhibit 9 - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Exhibit 10 — EPS Report Exhibit 11 — 11/27/2006, Sheets C1-CS VTM, Sheets DI-D5 Development Plan (Public Works Revised Stormwater Control Plan Maps) Exhibit 12 = 9/71'2006, Sheets Cl-CE VTM_. Sheets DI-D5 Development Plan. Architecture Elements 1.'Curr•ni Mi.nn•e•.r.n•n. .ii hen r 51)Ii110]F• I:.) u4.uo "' 5-22 Bf JAN Q LU y � W G A R...•.._..a.+'Fa.-" S.s z.. �r�a^sau s-' _ G f_o v q v�J .,,a cz a _. � % �?� n -sn�� ��xsa?'3sT_£y"�q`r .n �`A� (7 '•' s `- •---• f i Vt r g o J I SriirM a i IT' M `(J C .>C 6.43 ���., '� rs[:2'�'S�.'T 9s....eu-'+.�3 .•. __.. _•--- ...� VI - , -' may ' ra rf N \ rti> �M1 t' o ^ 1 ►'" " .IM 4.lk rx RIC 1-1NI0[4D PARKWAY rat � 9 :U .r U> kh t r. � ill^4 ---- -�- fit m n a c x PtJj7 ' e 1 "ST X71) CF[I Lilt ° ta;to Cl je �l `i9 Aerial Photo: Nove Property . 1 r , ..-�.�.:'� r t 46WaJ r ro `Brooksitle r c " J�� `tea:"'-''.'- v. d I r �; a, �._,,,"•, � �" y �e�'+�1�''� � ,"'.� ,p rt""' ' �'7Y'. _ xy„ -- J { �• �a�. ala:, ^ r o€r4 Lqj- 408180010 ..3t _; :'�o � ;: �•,-� ��o '' `� Ri o ifie �r .• ,gr d t r.s �� r.' t .,.•iii 408170072 E r. 429 f. ��` _ r _. '� �. +� ;,r �.:• tC... z-u e� '� �K 6� .arL�' Market Ave .L { e� { J 1 L 1 tr — - a !r5y11 �" �• � .1-. ,S {__� .ts r#'.� � ^'i� [ �! i u .i,,.r - 't [ � f��� �l� Ir .�� N u.owfm marmm YRS,W,uyR GOfi^JGOp6 Feet w E 0 125 250 500 -- s U V County File: GP0400O8 Current General Plan Designations for Parcels 408180010 and 408170072 (Hove Property) General Pian Designations SH(Single Family Residential-High) s ML(Multiple Family Residential-Law) 4 Q LI(Light Industry) HI(Heavy a OI PS(Public/Semi-Public) j it Q PR(Parks and Recreation) , i OS(Open Space) Pittsburg 408180010 DavillaRd is J t 1� it ©e @arlo Ave E 408170072 ��-----� McKosken L? ifAar4cet Ave _ , a U) 5 y ..��� e Silver Ave E t 1 r w; { (Grove Ave m. W Ruby St. w� ,. _ iY I i Ghesley Ave _C1!9 i y.Ave ' !icma ._.. s r�ra�l+a tUta5o9 W9otsN 61Pliffiw1 Po e 'Rf'�`0444000s N Feet w emnoan. .«d. ti 0 125 250 500 E ��T � Q County File: GP040008 Proposed General Pian Designations for Parcels 408180010 and 408170072 (Hove Property) _ . .I i { — General Plan Designations SH(Single Family Residential-High) MM(Multiple Family Residential-Medium) —_- 0 ML(Multiple Family Residential-Low) Fm } LI(Light Industry) 0 t HI(Heavy Industry) + f PS(Public/Semi-Public) PR(Parks and Recreation) OS(Open Space) Pittsburg 408180010 Davilla Rtl I I �1 chmond -ario E i cis 4Q$170Q72 t1� ar e4c t 1�ve n L I: Silver Ave N E 'a _ cry ;Grove Ave t i Ruby St S f� Marcus Ave fi - _._ hesley Ave Chesley Ave Malcolm l=estw � amm.n.0 abwmm.cam caw cover�+�ax.,. 0 125 250 500 �<x Terme catwm.wn'cbbwnrem.wr..ata.m.a nn.ra & AM,eFb artN Wbn+NJa YgM.lYwaObfnYp4MblYnetl san m.muar a am,ae.�em,a a bmy e�me¢pn:arm.. �X�LBtT oa o' D ° , 1; t11 1 it 1: 1t still met t1 . a// /�11® Mm 8110.11C OWN ®�® ® ®DA 111%1 %■I 11111 ®Il® . _ 111/ � s/i®///// ®1 1®1 .11 IIIA II ®o//among®///® ..�. e WIN MW ®i ®/®/// MW lots is o wow= 1,11 111 1 ® ®rells ° ® �s®/®®VON 50 Notes looms ■ I�IdI X11111OEM . ® °- ®1141111 -1�11� /©� sell PUSH 1 11 / ' �� til Siate 01 f__aIjfornl2 -T' ?_Dspurce 4aencv _)LD SCHWA.PZEN aGGEE. Governor +' DEPAR I MEN T DIF rt__)H AND CAlvi` 'nrro://www.dic.ca.ao\ POST OFFICE BOX. - YOUNT/ILLE.;;AI FORNir. 945c:. _ µ. (70i __ nr - r L'05etTia7�C ��era„COun vAaminis_ration Buiidinc Gcl amine �� Gtr. l00r , 1V0r=.. V:in� I ar7lpe— , SIL. 94 _-0095 Dear M-c Pi etras : hove Property" Subdivision lvd. 0_93'0G3ro F.ichmorid, Contra Costa County SD05R938 /Dp0_530-'4 Department of Fish and Game (DFG) personnel nave rev' =wed the subject project, and we have the >:ollo-Dina comments . comOet:e assessment of the flora and fauna wil thin aL rid ad-iaCent LC) :.he proDect area, w2-th par_icuiar emphasl s uDU n identlf-ylnq endangered, threatened, and local- v uniqu- si:'e civS and sen:lzlve habitats, should be orovlded. Pare, threa_e Tied and enaarioered Species tc- be addressed shouid include al LhC`se WhiOn meet tfl� Calilornla nvironmental Qual1L - de_ini-�ior, (see CEQL Su1dG1ines S-_C=ior1 l_3)8G, Tr?_ arse ZE-men should i.denti=v anv rare plants and rare riatural ::ommuni ti es (1,_I i c'i'v71rSC, L r_. Guideline .O_ ° �� ?nC _rSc -- - -___ c- ! Oti)C: "1'OleC 01; Ka_E , ThfeaterleL' and Endarioefed Plari=_ arid' Iia t_l a _. _.0mmun1 lUc _'�vlsedaV' O , f100 '• Trite Guld='lii"!:' ar ava =_abic E17 �iw�: . c�� . c� . ac>-j . w:ndab. ,L,dou id e r) i. VOu riaV any questlOri please Or! dC_ N1T Car I V!_ _co::, Hare__a- :or:se_-va=iorl Manage,- , a i7G7 , S2 . _n e --1 F'.01 V'' oaS_ �o�z,cn�iny �a�i/0 'a ���iLc ii fc �Sincc f70 EBAILIL REVEW Or AOEN "'Y PLANNING APPLICCATION - — --- THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL TO PPOVIDE NJATEP S=PVF �. "=D, The tecnn;cai data supited herein is oased on oreitmtnary tniormauon, is subtect io revision and is to ce used for D iannino pumos_ ONLY EBMUD MAP(Si: - jDATE: D4i1212005 1^61853&.1;58p538.1461B53c.1458853•= =gM UD FIL=:S,8038 j CY FILE:SD058738/DP0 302; FILE TYPE:Develop rnent Pian AGENCY: Gonda Costa Couni,� AGEN t Community Development Department f Attn:Rosemarie Pietras 651 Pine Street,4th Fioot, North Wing MARTINEZ,CA.94553 .i i OWNER: Nove Investments.Attn: APPLICANT: Sionature Properties, c/o Joe Zawiski Dennis Va rni 1 4670 Willow Road, Ste 200 3B25 Happy Valley Road Pleasanton, CA 94588 Lafayette, CA 94549 DEdZELDPMENT:DAfA. Ktl5zI T I" y ADDRESS/LOCATION:500 Pittsburg Avenue City:RICHMOND Zip Code: ZONING:P-1 PREVIOUS LAND USE: Nursery w/greenhouse DESCRIPTION:Development of 374 residential units consisting of 90 single family homes, `TOTAL ACP.EAGE:2�11).':ac. 144 townhomes,and 140 condominiums TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT Single Family Residential:90 UnitsMulti Family Residential.284 Units !WATER SERVICES DATA ELEVATION RANG O PROPERTY: to EBMUD I ELEVATION RANGES OF STP,EETS: I PROPERTY TO 6 I]EVELOPED: 10-1 10-1 All of development must be served from main erilensionfs) None from existing maims) Location of Existino Main(s):Pittburp Ave i Location of Main(s) PRESSURE ZONE i SERVICE ELEVATION RANGE PRESSUPE:ZONE SERVICE ELEVATION RANGE -- -- ------- --- - ----- -------------------------! `GOA, I o-10O I 1 :COMMENTS _ A main extension, at the proiect sponsor's expense,will be required to serve the proposed oeveiopment.Oft-site pmekn'e improvements, also at the project sponsor's expense, may be required depending on domestic water demands and fire fiov., requirements set by the local fire department. Off-site pipeline improvements include.but are not limited to. reoiacern ent of exisuna pipelines to the project site.When the development plans are finaitzed. the proieci sponsor should contact EBMUD's New Business Office and reouest a water service estimate to determine the costs and conditions of providino water service to the o eveioomen: i Enoineerino and installation of water mains,ofi-site pipeline improvements, and services redutres substantial lead time,which should oe provided for in the proieci sponsor's development scheduie. Due to EBMUD`s limited water suppi,;, ail customers snould pian tar shortages in time of arouoht. � I I JLM CHARGES OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE: Contact the EBMUD New Business Office a! (510)227-1008. I 1 I � /�1�•LL t•�l:1.- _ /�� David J Pennstrom.Sentor Civil Enainee-, DATE WATER SERVICE PLANNING SECTION i Rk CC cont)-c- C,o_3t0 County �. ( � ,Y_; Tire `'I'ola..Ilon J!sI'I"tCt r Fire Cniei KEITH RICHTE-P Hpril 18, 2005 Ms, Rosemarie Piet-,as Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-0.095 Subject: Nove Property, DPO53024 500 Pittsburg Avenue, North Richmond CCCFPD Project No. 104948 Dear Ms. Pietras: We have reviewed the development pian application to establish a 374 Residential Un it Planned Unit Development at the subject location. This project is regulated by codes, fegulatio ns, and ordinances administered by this Fire District and the State Fire Marshals Office. if approved by your office, the follnwing shall k.A inC #fed as conditicns.of approval: 1. The developer shall submit two (2) complete sets of pians and specifications of the subject project, including any required built-in fire protection systems, for review and approval prior to construction to insure compliance with minimum requirements related to fire and life safety. Plan review fees will be assessed at that time. (103.3.2.4) CFC 2. The developer shall provide an adequate and reliable water supply for fire proieotion as se fart" ;n the r'21ifgrnia Fire Code as fGiIovvs: (9,03.i j QFC I. Single family residential units require a minimum fire flow of 2.000 GPM Required flow shall be delivered from not more than two (2) hydrants flowing simultaneously while maintaining 20 pounds residual pressure in the main. 11. Multiple family residential units require a minimum fire flow-of 3:000 GPM Required flow shall be delivered from not more than three (3) hydrants flowing simultaneously while maintaining 20 oouhaa residuai'pressure in the main This does not include the reduction for the installation of automatic fire sprinklers. The developer shall provide 16 hydrants of the East Bay type Hydrant locations will be determined by this office upon submittal or.three (3) copies of a tentative map or site plan. (903 4:2) CFC 4. Provide access rcadways with all-weather driving suraces cf not less than 20 Tee; unobstructed width, and not less than 13 feei 6 inches Gf vertical clearance. to within 150 2010 Geary Road • Pleasant Hill. California 94523-4694 •TeieDhone (925' 941-330b• Fax (925i 941-3309 -3s' Dahl; •-_lenrpn�r^`'5t-c. 130 2,'icc; l U l 3oc, vuo-:: r ounr, e_nnore WWVd.CCCTD0.oro CCCFPD Project No. 104Q4c+ Apri 1 1S. 2005 feet of Travel distance to all portions of the exterior walls of every buliding. Access roads shall not exceed 1 50io arade,, shall have a minimum outside turning ,adius of 4 5 fee;. and must be capabie of Supporting the Imposed IoadS of fire apparatUS; i.e., 3/ ?Dns. !902.2) CFC Note: Access roads of 20 feet unobstructed width shall have NO PARKING sions posted or curbs painted red with the words NO PARKING - FIRE LANE clearly marked. Roads 28 feet in width shall have NO PARKING signs posted, allowing for parking on one side only, or curb painted red with the words NO PARKING - FIRE LANE clearly marked. Roads 36 feet in width allow for parking on both sides. 5. Access as shown*on the Preliminary Site Plan dated February 18, 2005 does not comply at this time due to only one point of access for more than 25 homes. A second emergency vehicle access shall be provided for Streets F, K, L, M and N. (902.2.1) CFC, Appendix III-D, Section 2.1, CFC 6. Center divide medians on any access roadways shall leave a minimum remaining lane width of 20 feet on each side. A rolled curb and an unobstructed drivable sur;ace on the median may be used to 2ESiSt with meeting apparatus turning radius requirements. 7. Dead-end Fire District access roads in excess of 150 feet Iona shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of Fire District apparatus. Streets O, P, and 0 as proposed on Sheet 1 dated February 18, 2005, shall be designed to meet with these requirements. (902.2.2.4) CFC i . The developer shall submit three (3) copies of site improvement plans indicating fire apparatus access and turnaround area for review and approval prior to construction. (902.2.2.1 CFC Note: This may be the same submittal as the hydrant locations if necessary. �'. The developer shall provide a computer-aided desion (CADIdioitai file copy of the subject project upon final approval of the site improvement plans or subdivision map. CAD file shall be saved in an AutoCAD© 2002 file format or DXF Tile format. Contact this office fcr.current acceptable AutoCADC) version .10. Access roads and hydrants shall be installed. in service: and approved prior to construction. (5704.1) CFC 11. Approved premise identification shall be provided. Such numbers shall contrast with their background and be readily visible from the street. (901.4 4) CFC 12. The deveioper shall provide traffic signal pre-emption systems (Opticom) on any new tra ic, sianais installed with this develooment. . CC=PD Proieci No. 10494E Aril 7E, 20C, Imo. No flammable cr combustible iicuid stGraGe shall be located on the si?e 1JVithout obtaining approval and necessary permits from the Fere District. i4 The home(s) as proposed shall be protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system complying with NFPA 13 P, / D. Submit two (2) sets of plans to this off ice for review and approval prior to installation. (100:.1) CFC, Contra Costa County General Pian 15. The applicant shall submit two (2) sets of fire sprinkler plans, hydraulic calculations, and well specifications to the Fire District for review and approval prior to installatic>n. Should a water supply tank be required, also submit three (3) sets of the following: tank specifications and plans, tank location site plans, and fire pump specifications. Plan review fees will be assessed at that time. 16. Submit plans to: Contra Costa County Fire Protection District 2010 Geary Road Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 To schedule field inspections and tests, call 925-941-3323. It is requested that a copy of the conditions of approval for the subject project be forwarded to this office when compiled by the planning agency. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. Sincerely; r, � � r Kaeli Lepkowsky Fire Inspector KL/nlr c Mr. Dennis Varni Nove investments 3825 Happy Valley Road Lafavette, CH, 94549 Mr. Joe Zawiskl Signature Properties 4670 Willow Road, Suite 200 Pleasanton, CA 94588 File 104948I1, WEST COUNTY Wks-TEWATER Intl ,. 1--LiDii� aeno, -7 C, -�-7- 2.o r =-!=-Dnone a junt 23.2005 Rose Marie Picrras. Pro itct Planner Contra Costa Count}. Community Development D--partintril County Administration Building 651 Pint Street. 4"Floor,North W=, iviaT-tlnez, Cy, 4455;-009� Subject: County File No. SD OS-8938 (374 Residential Units "Nova Property" at 500 Pittsburg Avenue, Richmond. California (APN's 40S-170-072 and 408-180-010) Dear Rost Marie Pietras: The West Counry Wastewater District(W(7WD) appreciates this opportunity to comment on Count), File No. SD 054938 (374 Residential Units). The wastewater service, is available for this proposed development to Prqiect Sponsor sub.1tcl to submitun- and compiving with the following I. The properties (APNI 4W-170-072 and 40E-1St)-010)are not within the WCIAID boundary I and must be annexed. (AnnexationFees will be prepared upon submission of 101' annexation, Plot Map and description of'propeml) The proposed development is located less than 200 ftCi from the 'AICIA71 wastewater treatment piant facilities. Sorne odors may be noticed infi-qutridY at the InLCT-StCIJ0II Of Pittsburg Ave-nut and Richmond Parkway. )anitary se-IATT pian nas not been received Contact 1AICIAID staff regarding possible point of connection and possible off-site IMPT'n-VCment reOUITed on -xisunL,dolwnstrcarn saniui.r,,stm,.-T Submit two (2) set,, ofjTentative Map. Citottci-mical Rt'pom� and Gradin,' Plans, I %47 Board approval (Fees will be prepared upon submission of tentative map. L-radinL,man,,* and, Geoiec?iriical report) ion cost csumait TOT S2,ini=., Submit two sets of improvement plans and -.nTn-.CT',-,construction stw.,T main extension for 'AIC"XI) approval 7-rit, sewer main n consiruciion permit must be omained from tine 'A - "YVI)pTi or to man of coconstructionoftht: sannary stwn, ff construction cost) M..J Rost Marr Pietras. I'rOleCi .runner Contra Costa County Counrr Flit No, SD 0:,-F-3'6wova Pronem. .i ure 200: 6. Ii is the Prolect Sponsor's responsi ihr,`to construe: sanitan sewer mains. laterals arid. appurtenances to the nearest availabia exlsiln� �'!C�'vD iaciliri'. Gne hunClred percent(l 00"0) Performance and Maintenance Bond is to be tiled with WCV'D for sanimn; seg.,cr main prior to start of construction. Submit Grant of Easements for.all sanitary sewer mains intended for dedication to the WCWD even within dedicated street rights-of-way. Such easements shall be a minimum of fifteen (1 5) feet wide and twenty (20) feet wide where tine depth of the line is in excess of ten(10) feet deep. Paved access shall be provided to all manhoies and rodding inlets for maintenance trucks. S. Sanitary Sewer Connection fees for three hundred seventy--four (374)residential 'homes must be paid prior to the inspection and approval of the buiiding sewer laterals. Fee estimate will be prepared upon submission of plans. 9. Obtain a permit for each building from the District prior to the inspection and approval of the building sewer laterals. 10. WCWL>approval is required prior to finalizing,permit or pnor to granting certificate-of occupancy. S1nCerth" Paul D. Winnicla District Engineer PD W/AIU-:l ca CC: Signature Properues. c/() Jot Dwisiv. 4670 Wilioov Load. Suite 200. Pleasanton. CA 04551; ;rw(i-c ,-rc, nair!enr Suodrvisi�rs'au6" ':'.Nara'rror.^_rr;.niannm^subdr:iyjn u(>_L.oat TRAC Poll August 26. 200:, 73 Belvedere Ave. Richmond. CA 94801 Phone/Fax: 510-23-5-2835 Email:bevaert«earth.link.net Ms. Rosmane Pietras Contra Costa County Community Development Dept. 651 Pine St., 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, CA 9435 3) Dear Ms. Pietras: As you suggested.. TRAC, The Trails for Richmond Action Committee. is writing to recommend recreational, aesthetic, planning and transportation impacts which should be considered in the Initial Study for Signature Properties proposed residential development on the Nova site east of the Richmond Parkway a-nd north of Wildcat Creek (reference. SDO-8938 L DP053024). TRAC's primary interest in this project is to ensure that there will be convenient pedestrian and bicvclist connections between the east side of the Richmond Parkway and the San )~ranciscO Bay Trail with its related shoreline parks. The proposed project is immediatele adjacent to the Wildcat Creek Regional Trail. which connects with the completed San Francisco Bad Trail on thewest side of the Richmond Park-way. In addition. East Bav Regional Park District plans to construct a new Bay Trail segment from the Wildcat Creek Regional Viewpoint along the west side of West Counn- Wastewater District Property to connect with San Pablo Creel; and the phase 1 West Count- Landfill Bad, T rail to be completed this tall by Republic Services. All of these completed and planned trails areshown on the attached Richmond Bay Trail map as adopted in ABAG's San Francisco Ba\, Trail Plan and in the December 17, 2002 Contra Costa Countywide. Bicycle. and Pedestrian Plan. The Initial Study should consider the direct. indirect and cumulative imparts of th. Signature Homes project combined with all developments underway. proposed and reasonable anticipated in the. viciniry.. includinL, the I� Home residential project on the south side of Wildcat Creel`:. Aesthetic impacts: The initial Stuciv should address aesthetic IMI'Dar--U, of the project TOT users of )�Tildcat Creel; Regional Trail Bad Trail. To that end. th: .initial Stud should include plan view drawings of the project which show thee location of the Wildcat Creel: Trail. planned connections with it and landscaping. Cress section drawings should include landscaping, as well as buildings and other structures nearest the trail so a reviewer can understand the relationship of building height to trail width and trail distance from structures. Recreational Imnacts: Referring to the. checklist. Signature residences, combined with KB Home's project and Parkway Estates will substantially "increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities ...... Indeed.. the proximity) of the Wildcat Creek Trail and the Bay Trail will be'major reasons why people would choose to reside in the proposed new residential development. Residents with their visiting friends and relatives, will need a completed trail lint:for walking, running and biking to the. Bay Trail and planned connections with shoreline parks, including the Landfill and Point Pinole Regional Shoreline. A major consideration is that the Wildcat Creek Regional Trail route west, which is in the Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, is unusable during the winter and spring seasons.due to flooding and siltation. This half-near gap in a County- desiLynated trail should be. addressed in the Initial Study. If a mitigated negative declaration is considered, mitigation should include correction of this problem, e.g. by modification of the Parkway underpass design or by providing an overpass. Transportation Impacts: In addition to thet recreational uses described above. the. Wildcat Creek Regional Trail will provide a convenient connection with Verde. Elementary School for parents and children. TP-AC, the Trails for Richmond ,Action Committee. would appreciate receiviPL7 CEQA and all other notices concerning this project. Please send notices both to me and Whitney Dotson at the following addresses: Bruce Bevaert. 71 Belvedere Av. Richmond. CA 94801 Whitney Dotson, 4109 JtnLins Way. Richmond, CA 94801 Thank VOL Very iiiuch. Sincerelti_ _ Bruce Bevaert. TRAC Chair cc: Vdhitne.v Dotson Brad Olson L Jim Townsend - EBRPD .. :.. .. _ Wilson .rte .. _. _ �f y =Bay frail _ Fotn-'3' • .�',��.�-� � I Complete M.e. Incomplete ���•�� _ ofe►ft = Atlas Connector trails =��.-�x�,..� Complete incomplete ' Q o Parkslopen Space -- ._= Water Bodies ' x>iv msc �k1 t I . ' � • ' � . .. . ,E'ry ,' '%; . Parc West Count �Y ��. ., — SAN PABLO y Landfill ' " - W.. Trail ..- Davis d _ Part, a Gertrude B SY• Vivan Penn ja Ricnmonc.l �Q BART Ii n sr C station i 'RICHMOND fCD _I/ltes=acdo.nald .. c? - -� ' � entral�Riciarr�F nd Greenw EI Cerrito b• rk { . C del No I BAP,T Station �i 580 _mac: ` Marina Bay,Pkwy.. Ma ina l eBay Pdrk i. �, Flo:Hall r� anna �, '4l i L. zr i RU . W„ e East E _ �• t: `t�;,��'" Lucretiaggw r 1a ss AM v ,: 4 e itrrua•a y r.. 5�a `?. "._ 'ri'w'a"" �.i•J%4ii" -r=-^n 'r "''f3�i"vn i:an"vl�� are,.ww wa tF +rr, —yN^-•e ssrtvxuL�'•"v.6�f2Fe.l'�wn!�mtJwPo,nd-1nPr• �r'''1r.0_ r ^�if4-S,;r.'S:S'�.;raa- �.r`�i "'"�'`µ-x:� w"n.:. "•'".FFB ,b"s7'G:�:.z"L"'TM .�I.."'"`. f..g- ;Sa��lr trooks Ms{an� •�Reaton=Mx. XMMMIrz, al ..B=se•?rm�,. �"r'3:S"°'^.".!'Z°f'f"'�"ir+7n�,t�' .t<. .�=y�n ..± „�u,...�:s^�t�._:.,a.�®�.,,-,r-�-aw-s. :. �surP.�.a�s_+v�!�m - +�rwFnm;- _tet: fm:rs5F mut'. .. ndc0.?Yii��ho—'s.. ;;--' �-.%�s,c": .cax"r"_.',a.N—.:.a r�.�..niAi<'. arF_8'iG7fu•�."�"z�s--T7'�t::.T /;i.s•.�a,. hi_,�...._ i d ,'—_ � ttl75t ._F✓�Y_L 1`:Y-.�_•Y� t�.��.f,.-.rl,.�_!"y T _ V isbrl ._� Say T,-ail Ptndle r — " Complete =Io.nh- 4 Incomplete •..•... Connector trails ' Complete Incomplete a��-- • '-k;._.fir .. Sj Parks/Open Space •. :...-•- _ p,' Q Water Bodies westCoun 'q-, - SAN'WP -- :Landfill Trail. ` fes.' " - ,. �� Davis 11 Park �'•. ern Gertrude tF cr) ��'' •. Pennsvlvan r� �7G Richmond �p4' 'BART I Station:I ;P,I C H-M.O N D ;; CO -� �oV�LesUMiacdonal. ! F, Z ... Ohio Ave ... .... . .,.. h't I� '•'w "� Central Richrrd Greenw •• EICerrito o' eXa. v i } IYn del No Cuttino Blvo BART 2 'F� E Staiion mom.580 Marina BayPkv+y, w Be'ae Manna } v S a',= '' ay P66 Mi.;a ,`.'+n p� � tL • ,. i SO Hall ` ski.•- , S ]�'�� .."1;�41^.tt. �t , Fi�G�'If�U(•.r :I� tM � � t s. Omar'O� PaF . � -YYY1117Fe`xi1'"I�uaruS7:>trSiW �v is-rt � , c��Y»jV��•)a'$+,��,�awii�pw�urunnst�i'.i„�r� c�7 �� ary,��,s'� 5F-.� _� •r a,a,i"nn.+r•. `••"ems.S'im �+srin?&w+ n"TKr'i[�^f3n sei•,'T' rr:^+• �w•-'•,—.o�.ni.*m%s.... 5.•,e ;r,�"Tse^m..r ,.D1f1Y�••-• L ��2'� NE••.. 3i s�, t.m.^e•� G"r.-. e 1 �'•w=�i•.rtt"'�,z"n"G•'f y�^�"'fi.""t' 7"i._,^` i '7"'�Y-•dart r"�2G1�'�`i""' i • ..- W'�J'•c-..�..�N���•• •�aa'• r��a.� hf'Y r�,b ..�.+.G".•-.v T z .c :i' -z^Y,� c�'�. 4. .s Y �e1Dflcl'i^PrF'SArve1 '.._C' �^•" 6L^'C:. M1i_ JLL FmA '4 'L'� '�— �.+ "'rSLR•m�.r+.••.•".�wa+n rl�re rhe. •� � +t•m..m— ,ae+e-.r•-.rrn ..z-,,.Le- •,��.us..v..,,,.vr..-' ., ,v.:....wu..,lwu�r.1:+v4-++1'�•t�•....+:Sl+��..N'✓3LJ9a.(L u,.LSiJY �u.+.u_.•s.yl]1[ +.f```+'�'...�.iwVnm w..r ��-.. ." Le '..,.'1'C:.-T'=.4Ca Iil •av '.— T - ,�O L� __.I: 11 ..�a_z:m•_tea,,, ,smr-+sizpr •-:7•fi•;�;,+nf?.?r -von-s - T='- .•_..-9�`F._";?r. ..�_wm_•�r..c�u1i4..�'3.-?RP.vr�.—. .'sz'mwa:",4Ksdy'•f�"�.F�-I �?s?�r-p "-.:r`atifr/�.tfl{n���•!F T n�,, ,,77 FX3:^ir-v�.-�;9�7. I`��F4'I.RdirII+.7C'77�' "ct"•_,T';t min_-�zv.�il•i�# _ _�i�':'.-3i!P�*'+_T?�r?�919�*T�_rSiB"�fr�-�dtm.R9_"y-:-7i'�tC-',=n',.,r�"'L13f,3iru rm•, ��j .�h I-IT Government iniormnuon y INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NE=GATIVE DECLARATION NOVE PROJECT OCTOBER 2000 TABLE— 0= CONTE—NTS nvironmental Checklist Form _ Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Sources Environmental Checklist 7 1. Aesthetics / II. Agricultural Resources 9 III. Air Quality 10 IV. Biological Resources 21 V. Cultural Resources 24 VI. Geology and Soils 26 VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 31 VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality 33 IX. Land Use and Planning 40 X. Mineral Rights 42 X1. Noise 43 X11. Population and Housing 49 XIII. Public Services 51 XIV. Recreation 55 XV. Transportation/Traffic 57 XVI. Utilities and Service Systems 62 XVII, Mandatory Findings of Significance 65 LIST OF TABLES Table III-1 Diesel Particulate Matter Cancer Risk Calculation 16 Table XV-1 Baseline + Project Intersection Operations 5e Table X\/-2 Cumulative Year 2020 intersection Operations 59 LIST OF FIvURES (Figures follow page 66) Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Proposed Project Figure 3: Aerial View Figure 4: Chevron Refinery Wind Rose APPENDICES Appendix: A Project Description Faae 1 L:\Hove\Initial Studv x Mitioated Neaauve Declaration 10/16/2006 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Proieci Title. Nove Residential Development General Plan Amendment (County File: GP#0^-00081 DP= 0"-3024, and SD#05-8938) 2. Lead Agency Name and Contra Costa County Address: Community Deveiopment Departmen t 651 Pine Street, 2nd Fioor, North 1N'i ng Martinez, CA 94553 3. Lead Agency Contact Person: Rose Marie Pietras (925) 335-1216 4. Project Sponsors, Signature Properties Representative and Address: 4670 Wiliow Pass Road, Suite 200 Pleasanton, CA 94588-2710 5. Project Location: North Richmond (unincorporated are a of Contra Costa County), on the east si de of the Richmond Parkway between Pittsburg Avenue and Wildcat Creek (Census Tract 3650.02). See Figure 1 for the project's location, 6. Existing General Plan, Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) Designation: 7. Zoning (Existing. L Proposed). Planned Unit District (P-I) 8. ' Description of.Proiect: An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005- 2020) redesignating two parcels totaling 29.2 acres, from Heavy and Light Industry to Multi Family Residential - Medium Density and approval of a Vesting Tentative Map. The two parcels (APN 408-180-010 and APN 408-170- 072) are being proposed. for the development of a residential subdivision-with 370 residential units: 120 - 2 story T ownhomes; 1 10 - 2 story cluster homes, and 140 condominiums (both 1 and 2 stories). Of these, 57 units wo uid be affordable units. All parking would be onsite.' A total of 6.7 acres of open space/pa rk area is proposed. A more complete project description is contained in Appendix A. Daae 2 L\Novelinidal Study Mitigated Neoative Deciaration`.10118/2006 The site is within the West County VVastewater District services area but will require annexation. An existing. flower growing operation occupies the two parceis. The site is bordered by Richmond Parkway to the west, Pittsburg Avenue to the north, Central Avenue to the east, and Wiidcat Creel:, a Contra Costa County flood control channel, to the south. The site is relatively flat and predominately occupied by a combination of greenhouses and growing areas that contain plastic plant flats. The greenhouse areas are laid out in rectangular plots, with relatively wide, gravel- covered roads between them. Several one- story, wood-framed buildings are located near the center of the site. See Figure 2 for a map of the Proposed Project. 9. Surrounding Land Use and The parcels are bounded by the Richmond Settings: Parkway on the west, Wildcat Creek on the south and Pittsburg Avenue to the north. :Surrounding land uses of adjoining properties are a sewage treatment plant, light industrial and floricultural growing and distribution operations. See Figure 3 for an aerial photograph of the uses surrounding the Proposed Project. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose California Department of Fish and Game Review and/or Approval is (CDFG) Required (e.g., permits, Regional Water Quality Control Board financing, approval, or (RWQCB) participation agreement): City of Richmond Contra Costa County LAFCO West Countv Wastewater District Paas LANove\initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration+.10/1812006 ENVIRONMENTAL FA--TOPS POTENTIALLY AFFE.TED The environmental factors checked below would be poteniially afiectet by this wrote Involvinq at least one Impact that is "POtentialiv Significant impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following page: Aesthetics Acirlcultural Resources Air Quality Bioiooical Resources I Cultural Resources l Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous I Hydrology and Water I Land Use and Piar-ining I Materials Quality 1 i Mineral Resources I Noise i POIDulation and HD uslno_ I Public Services f I Recreation ; T ransoortaitonl T ra ffic Utilities and Service I Mandatory Findings of X I No issues Svstems f Sionificance ( I DETERMINATION On the basis of the initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. x I find that although the proposed proiect could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the.prDiect. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environrnent. but at least one eftect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as. described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially slonificant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated. An ENVIRONM=tJTAL 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 po tentialiy slonificant effects (a) have been analyzed.adea' pursuant to in an earlier EIR pursuanto apollcable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EiR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are Imposed upon the pr000sed protect. Signature Date Proiect Pianner Contra Costa County Community Development Department Page L LANove%Second Screen Check Initial Study&MND\1 0/1 812006 SOURCES In the process of preparinp the Checklist and conducting the evaluation, the following References were consulted. (These references are ayakabie for review at the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street, North Vying Floor, Martine.) 1 , Project Description for the Nove Residential Project General Plan Arnendment Study (Appendix A). 2. Contra Costa Resource Overlay Mapping System — Richmond, Quad Sheet Panel, USGS. 3. The (Reconsolidated) County General Plan (2005-2020) and EIR on the General Plan (January 1991); North Richmond Redevelopment Plan; and, P-1 : Planned Unit District Map for North Richmond, Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. July 2005. 4. Contra Costa County General Plan and Zoning Atlas Maps. 5a. Signature Properties. Preliminary and Final Development Plan and Tentative Map. August 1 , 2006. 5b. KTG.Y Group, Inc. Motor Court Buildings Architectural Drawings. March 28, 2005. 5c. McLarand Vasquez Emsiek & Partners, Inc. Single Family Homes Architectural Drawings. March 24, 2005. 6 California Department of Conservation. Map of Important Farmlands in Contra Costa County, October, 2000. 7. LSA, Cultural Resources Study Nove Project. January 011 , 2005. 8. Contra Costa County Keynotes: Habitat Types & Rare, Endangered or Threatened Plants of Contra Costa County. February, 1978. 9. Contra Costa County Watershed Atlas. 2003. 10. Notes and photographs from site visits on December 14, 2005 and January 4, 2005. - 11 . FEMA Digital Ci3 Flood Database. April 2004. 12. Treadwell and Rollo, Phase 11 =nvironmental Site Assessment. January 8, 2004. i SAAQMD. BAAOMD CERA Guidelines - Assessing the Air Ouality impacts al Projects and Plans, April 1996, Revised December 1999. Daae 5 .:\Nove\!nitia! Studv&Mitioated Neoative Declaration',10/18/2006 14. Dowling Associates. Truck RDute/Weight Limitations Survey for West Contra Costa County. December, 200 i . 1 E. Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc., Nove ProDeriv - Residential Devei ODmen Environmental Noise Study. January, 2005. 16. Dowling Associates, Inc., Nove Property Traffic Assessmeni. January, 200-5. 7a. LSA. Arborists Report, Nove Site. July 16, 2005. 17b. . Results of Biological Reconnaissance Survey. April 21 , 20 06. 17. ENGEO. Geotechnical Exploration. March 30, 2005. 16. 1 . Response to Peer Review Comments. July 26, 2005. 19. Myers, Darwin. Geological Peer Review. April 26, 2005. 20. Geological Peer Review. July 11 , 2005. 21. - TRAC, letter dated September 15, 2005. 22. Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar & Associates. Draft Storm Water Control Plan, Subdivision 8938- Nove Property, August 24, 2005; Revised September 2006. 23. Personal communication: 24(a) Vince Kilmartin, 24(b) Chris Weekley, 24(c) Donald E. Bruggers, 24(d) Rose Marie Pietras, 24(e) Patrick Roche, 24(f) Ruth Stamos. 24(g) Jim Kennedy, 24(h) Joseph Zawidski, 24(i) Bob Vranka , 24(j) D'Andre Wells, 24(k) James Reyff, 24(I) George Nickelson, 24(m) Keith Hoey, 24(n) Dave Vintze, 24(o) Tim Jensen, 24(p) Monish Sen, 24(q) Jim TDWnsend. Page 6 LANove\Initial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration \10/16/2006 ENVIRONMENTAL CH=%CKL;S T Potentiahy Significant j i ! Potentially Unless Less Than I Significant I Mitigation ; Significant ? No impact I incorporated impact impact 1. AESTHETICS Would the proposal: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) b. Substantially damage scenic I >: resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic ! highway? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) I c. Substantially degrade the existing i j X visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Sources 1, 2, ` 3, 4 & 5a-c) d. Create a new source of substantial i I X. light or glare which would adversely affect day or! nighttime views in the I I area? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) impact La. and b.: Scenic Vistas, Scenic Resources and Scenic Quality. No Impact. The site is not a scenic vista (as defined by the Contra Costa General Plan) nor is it near a scenic highway. Furthermore there are no scenic resources on the site; therefore, the project will have no impact on these resources. This is a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measure La. and b.: None Required. Impact l.c.: Visual Character or Quality, Less than Significant With Mitigation. An amendment to`the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan indicating changes to the Land Use clement and maps would be required. The General Plan Land Use Element would need to re-desianate the parcel from heavy industrial and light industrial to residential and allow for the development of the 370 unit project. The Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020) identifies scenic resources in the County, including maior ridges, waterways, and scenic routes. The parcel has been leased to Color Spot, inc., for a flower growing and staging operation. Development of the subject parcels would change the view from Richmond Parkway from one of agricultural and industrial to urban. Landscaping is proposed to shield an up to 14 foot tali noise barrier (see Section XI). Along Pittsburg Avenue the landscaping would shield an up to 12 foot 'tall noise barrier. Until vegetation matures these noise barriers will be highly visible. Faoe 7 I-ANove\Initial Studv&Miticated Necaiive Declaration 1 1 0/1 812006 The landscape corridor along Richmond Parkway will be developed within th e City of Richmond maintained right-of-way. While no formal Landscape Pian has been developed at this time, the intention is to 'provide trees and shrubs along Ria hmond Parkway to screen the soundwall. Along Pittsburg Avenue the landsca'pino, will include trees, shrubs, a meandering soundwall and sidewalks as well as a 1 .7 acre pari;. The grassy areas will double as bio-swaies to filter runoff. Along Wildcat Creel; t he landscaping will screen the residential development. Cul-de-sacs will Includ connections for access to the creek area. Given the site is currently in a blighted industrial-agricultural use area, there is little likelihood that the Proposed Proiect would have a significant adverse impact on the physical environment with respect to aesthetic impacts. However, the 12 foot tall noise barriers could have a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure l.c.: The Project Sponsor shall develop a detaite d Landscape Plan that is acceptable to the City of Richmond and Contra Costa County and designed to screen the proposed noise barrier. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the Final Development Plans. The Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall ensure th at Landscape Plans meet with the County's and the City of Richmond's approval. Significance after Mitigation: Less Than Significant. impact Ld.: Light and Aare. Less Than Significant. Construction of the Proposed Project will affect the amount of glare emanating from the site. Most recently the site has been lighted for security purposes only. Outdoor lighting associated with the Proposed Development is to be designed and located to minimize ambient light levels for any given application, consistent with safety standards. Ornamental, pedestrian scale lighting fixtures shall be utilized to the degree possible. Lighting fixtures shall be designed to minimize glare and the direct view of lighting sources. Street lig hting will be down lit, thus reducing the potential for glare. This is a less than significant impact Mitigation Measure Ld.: None Required. Paoe 8 '_:1Nove\Initi@I 5tudv&Wicated Necaiive Geciaration',101181200fi Potentially Significant PotentialI Unless Less Than S i an if icant Mitigation Sion iii=ant No impact Incorporated ! imoa ct Impact :-Ii. AGRICULTURAL RESOURO'ES in i determining whether impacts to agricultural 1 i i resources are significant environmental ! effects, lead agencies may refer to the ! I California koricultural Land Evaluation and I i Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by i I the California Department.of Conservation as I ; an ootional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland.. Would I i the project: a. i Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide I i importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the l i Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resource ` Agency, to non-agricultural use? I (Sources 2, 3, 4, & 6) b. Conflict with existing zoning for j >: '• Agricultural use or a Williamson Act I , contract. (Sources 2, 3. 4, & 6) i C. involve other chances in the existing ! i x environment which, due to their L { location or nature, could result in L II conversion of Farmland, non- i 1 ` agricultural use? (Sources 2, 3, 4, & 6) I i i imaact il.a. - c.: Agricultural Soils, Agricultural Zoning.- leo Impact. The Proposed Project would not impact any prime, farmland and the subject parcels are not zoned agricultural.. While Color Spot, a.flower growing staging operation has been located-at this site,, it has resulted in the alte align of the site to a heavily compacted surface. According to the Phase II Environmental Site Assessment—the site is blanketed by about 2 to 3 feet of silty and clayey gravel fill." According to a review of the Important Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program for Contra Costa County, the land area is identified as urban / built up. The subject parcels are designated Heavy Industry (HI) and Light Industry (LI) under the Land Use Element Map, which is not an agricultural district. These parcels are not under a Williamson Act contract. Eased on the foregoing information, the project would not adversely affect agricultural resources in Contra Costa County. This is a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures ILa, - c.: None Required. Paee 9 L:\Hove\initia:Study Mitigated Negative Declaration'.10/181200:, Potentially Significant j Potentially Unless Less Tha in Significant Mitigation Sionificar-it No impact incorporated impact impact Ill. AIR QUALITY Where available, the I i significant criteria established by the li applicable air quality management or air i I pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project. j a. Conflict with or obstruct X I j implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 13 & 14,-24i and 24k ) b. Violate any air quality standard or X contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Source 1, 2, 3, i 13 & 14, 24i and 24k ) c. Result in a cumulatively X considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state j i ambient air=quality standard (including releasing emissions which I, exceed quantitative thresholds for i ozone precursors)? (Source 1, 2, 3, 13 & 14, 24i, 24k and 24n ) j d. 1 Expose sensitive receptors to I X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Source 1, 2, 3, 13' & 14, 24i and ' i 24k ) ' e. Create objectionable odors affecting I X I a substantial number of people? j I (Source. 1, 2, 3, 13 & 14, 24i and j 24k ) i Preface In 2006 Illingworth and Rodkin completed an air quality analysis of the Proposed Project. The Conservation Element of the 2005-2020 Contra Costa County General Plan includes Air Resources, policies and implementation measures. These policies and measures that apply to this project are summarized as follows: Paae 10 LANove\initial Studv Mitioated Neoative Deciaration\10/18/2006 i' Air Resources Policies 8-1D0 Vehicular emissions shall be reduced throuchout the County. 8-10 1 A safe, convenient and effective bicvcle and trail system shall be crsated and maintained to encourage increased bicycle use and walking as alternatives to driving. 8-102 /-,, safe, convenient pedestrian system shall be created and maintained in order to encourage walking as an alternative to driving. 8-103 When there is a finding that a project might significantly affect air quality, appropriate mitigation measures shall be imposed. 8-105 Land uses which are sensitive to air pollution shall be separated from sources of air pollution. 8-107 New housing in infill and peripheral areas which are adjacent to existing residential development shall be encouraged. Air Resources implementation Measures 8-dl. Review major development applications for consistency with regional air quality pian assumptions. 8-dm. Review major development applications to ensure that buffer zones are provided between major air pollution sources (freeways, industry, etc.) or sources of hazardous pollutants and sensitive receptors such as hospitals, convalescent homes and residences. 8-dn. Consistent with the uses and ranges of density specified in this plan, particularly those in the Land Use Element and the Growth Management Element, encourage development that would reduce long distance commuting, positively affect the desired jobs/housing balance or promote alternative forms of transportation. 8-cip. Review proposed development to encourage maximum use of bicycle, pedestrian and transit modes of transportation. Imnact Ill.a.: Air Quality Plans. Less Than Significant with Mitigation. The proposed project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, which is a state and federal "non-attainment" area for ozone and a state "non-attainment" area for particulate matter with less than a 1D-micron diameter (PM,p). The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), has recently prepared the draft Bay Area Ozone Strategy._ The Bay Area Ozone Strategy is a roadmap showing how the San Francisco Bay Area will achieve compliance with the State one-hour air quality standard for ozone as expeditiously as practicable and how the region will reduce transport of ozone and ozone precursors to neighboring air basins. Although the California Clean Air Act does not require the region to submit a plan for achieving the State PM,0 standard, the Ozone Strategy is expected to also reduce PM,c, emissions. The Ozone Strategy was approved at the end of 2005. The Revised San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan for the 1- Hour National Ozone Standard is .the Bay Areas plan for bringing the area 'into Page 1 L:1Novelinitial Studv Mitigated Negative Declaration 10/1812005 ccmpiiance with the Federal Clean Air Act). ' These plans contain mobile source controls, stationary source controls and transportation control measures to be implemented in the region to attain the State and Federal ozone standards within the Bay Area Air Basin. The plans are based on 'Do'Dulation, emplovment pr0jecrtions provided by local governments, usually developd as part of the General Plan uDdate process. The proposed project would develop 370 residential units (999 residents) on land that is currently designated as heavy- and light-industrial under the current Gens ral Plan designation. The net change to air quality could be higher emissions when compared with maximum build out under the General Plan designation of heavy industrial, depending upon the assumptions regarding the type of industrial use. The implications are that this change in land use could have an impact to regional air quality. However, this project would not be considered to have an impact on regional air emiss ions or to violate County or BAAQMD standards. According to the BAAQMD Guideline s, in order to evaluate local plan consistency with the CAP, the Lead Agency should co nsider the local Plan's consistency with the CAP population and vehicle use projections. While vehicle emissions will be higher than current uses, and potentially less than allowable under current zoning; the increase in population is likely to have been accommodated under that CAP projections. The additional population is a small percentage of the total County-wide growth projections (.001) as projected in the ABAG Projections 2005, for the year 2010. Conformity with regional air quality plans also includes the implementation Df Transportation Control Measures that local agencies are indicated as having a role in implementation. The project provides park area and connections to the loca I and regional trail system as well as being located near public transit. The measures that would apply to this project, which are included in the project description include: 1 . Provision of pedestrian signage and convenient pedestrian crQ ssings at strategic areas. 2. Landscape plans that ensure that new trees would shade build ings and walkways in summer to reduce the cooling loads on buildings. Provision of only low-emitting fireplaces for residential uses. The project includes a pedestrian, and bicycle-friendly neighborhood design that includes sidewalks and pedestrian paths, bicycle lanes, and bicycle storage areas. Note that the U.S. EPA recently revoked the 1-hour federal ozone standard., however, the reoion is designated nonattaninment for the new 8-hour standard that replaced the older one-hour standard. Until the region either adopts an approved attainment plan or attains the standard and adopts a maintenance pian, the Revised San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Pian for the i-Hour National Ozone Standard remains as the current federally approved plan. Pages 12 L:\Hove\initial Stuay Mitigated Negative Declaration\1 011 812 006 The General Plan policies, along with measures would imolement Transportation Control Measures consistent with those contained in the latest approved Clean Air Plan. The protect will result in construction activities that have the Potentia I for generating significant air quality impacis unless mitigated. Mitigation Measure Ill.a.1.: Construction Related The following is a list of feasible control measures that the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines recommend for construction emissions of PM,c,. These mitigation measures shall be implemented for all areas (both on-site and off-site) where construction activities would occur and be documented on a monthly basis via a construction report. 1. Sprinkle water to all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often when conditions warrant. 2. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. 3. Sweep daily all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. 4. Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. 5. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. 6. Enclose, cover, water 'twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). 7. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. B. install sandbags or other erosion-control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. 9. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 10. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site. 11 . Suspend grading activities when winds.exceed 25 miles per hour (mph) and visible dust clouds cannot be prevented from extending beyond active construction areas. Page 13 L:\Hove\Initial Studv Witoated Neaative Deciaration 10/18/2006 y Responsibility and Monitoring: The Contra Costa County Community Development Department and Building Inspection Division shall revie`nt and approve the development pians for Inclusion of the measures prior to approval of a grading permit. The Contra Costa County Community Development Department and Building inspection Division shall review the monthly construction report for compliance with these measures. Mitigation Measure III.a.2.: Construction Equipment The mitigation measures listed below should be implemented to reduce NO,: and diesel particulate emissions from on-site construction equipment. At a minimum, these measures should apply to the grading portion of the project: 1. Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from of-f-road diesel powered equipment. The project shall ensure that emissions from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in any c:p ne hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringeim ann 2.0) shall be prohibited from use on the site until repaired. 2. Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. 3. The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors). 4. Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks onsite could keep engines running continuously. Responsibility and Monitoring: The Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the development plans for inclusion of the measures prior to approval of a grading permit. The County shall review the monthly construction report to review and ensure Project Sponsor's compliance with these measures. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. imoact Ill.b.: Air Quality Standards, Less Than Significant. The project would generate traffic that would affect carbon monoxide concentrations along Richmond Parkway. Modeling of carbon monoxide concentrations was conducted at the intersection of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue, where Level of Service is predicted to be poorest. Currently, traffic along these roadways produce modeled worst-case roadside carbon monoxide concentrations of 4.8 parts per million (ppm') with background levels added. Tailpipe emissions rates are anticipated to decrease substantially over the next several years; however, traffic volumes will increase. In .2008, worst-case carbon monoxide concentrations associated with the pro-ie--t are anticipated to be about 4.4 ppm (with background added). While .emission rates Pace 14 L:\Nove\Initia!Study&Mitigated Negative Deciaration\10/1812006 decrease, the increase in traffic will cause 6-hour avemae carbon monoxide concentrations to increase to 4.9 ppm in 2020. The ambient air quality standard for carbon monoxide is 9.0 ppm for 8-hour averagingpenods; therefore, the proiect would not violate or contribute to a violation of an ambient air ouaiity_ standard. a iris than significant impact. Mitication Measure ill.b.: None Requires. Impact Ill.c.: Cumulative Air Quality Impacts. Less Than Significant. Operation of the project would result in emissions that are less than the quantified thresholds established by the BAAQMD for ozone precursor pollutants (i. e., reactive organic gases and nitrogen oxides) and PM,o. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, a project would have significant emissions impact if the project generated more than 80 pounds per day of an ozone precursor pollutant or PM,(,. Project emissions are calculated using the latest version of the URBEMIS2002 (version 8.7) model. The proposed project would generate about 51 pounds per day of reactive organic gases, 27 pounds per day of nitrogen oxides, and 24 pounds per day of PM,o. These emissions are similar to those that are generated by the existing office uses . The proposed project would not exceed the BAAQMD's emission significance thresholds, therefore not resulting in a significant impact. Mitigation Measure Ill.c.: None Required. impact Ill.d.: Sensitive Receptors. Less than Significant. Two types of impacts would occur: short-term emissions from construction activities that could affect nearby uses (see discussion of impact III.a.3., above) and potential exposure of future residents of the project to diesel exhaust, a known carcinogen, from truck traffic along Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. During construction, the operation of equipment and vehicles used for construction would emit hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter (consisting of windblown dust and diesel particulate). These emissions would affect both local and regional air quality. Without control measures, these emissions would 'be potentially significant, as they would lead to both possible health and nuisance impacts. The BAAQMD's approach to analysis of construction impacts is to emphasize implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures rather than detailed quantification of emissions (BAAQMD 1996, updated 1999). The proposed project would expose sensitive receptors (i.e., future residents) to diesel particulate matter (DPM) exhaust from trucks using Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. This impact was evaluated by modeling concentrations of DPM from Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue truck traffic at the proposed residences and evaluating those concentrations in terms of increased health risk. This method is acceptable to the BAAQMD for evaluating the impacts of exposure,to DPM from trust: traffic. Phone convemation with Dou❑ (BAF,DMP Pianner) or; Januar\l 18. 2OH, Paae 15 1Nove\1ni112l Study L Mitigated Neoative Deciaration`,10/18!2000 emission rates were developed using the EMFAC2002 model (with default in puts for Contra Costa County), The PM,c, emission factor for diesel trucks was obtained from the :M=AC2002 detailed emission factor output for the vears 2008, 2015, 2020, and 2040. mission factors were developed for two speed:• to account for the ei-fects of the signalized intersection. 15 miies per hour near the intersection, and 45 miles per hour for assumed free-flowinc sections of the roadway. A daily truck traffic volume of 2,722 trips on Richmond Parkway in 2001 was reported by Dowling Associates, Inc (2001 ). Projections of future truck volumes were not available. Truck volumes were assumed to increase proportionally with traff is projections (i.e., by 12% in 2008, 25%0 in 2015, 34% in 2020 and 47°/o in 204 O). There were no truck traffic volumes available for Pittsburg Avenue. However, trucic's do use the part of Pittsburg Avenue that is adjacent to the north side of the site to a ccess several facilities including the West County Integrated Resource Recovery F acility. A short-term count (10 minutes) indicates about 400 daily truck trips on Pittsburg Avenue.' Traffic volumes and emission rates were modeled at the proposed residence s that would be closest to Richmond Parkway using the Cal3ghcr line-source dispe rsion model. A five-year set of meteorological data collected at the Chevron Refinery (Years 1999-2003) was used with the model to obtain an average annual average concentration of DPM. Modeled maximum annual average concentrations of DPM and the associaterd health risk are reported in Table I11-1 . The maximum individual cancer risks were computed assuming both 30- and 70-year exposures. Maximum concentrations of DPM and associated health risk would occur closest to Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue, where annual concentrations are predicted to range from 0.11 microgram per cubic. meter (pg/m') in 2008 to 0.05 pg/m' by 2040. Over the course of both 30- and 70-year lifetime exposure, the incremental risk is calculated to be less than -10 excess cancer cases per million people at this first row of proposed residences. The DPM concentrations decrease at positions further from the roadways. TABLE 111-1 Diesel Particulate Matter Cancer Risk Calculation Exposure Average Period Concentration Cancer Risk (per million) i 30 Years 0.066 Pg/m, 11 I 70 Years 0.084 pg/mJ 20 j The highest risk would occur closest to the intersection of Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue and extending southerly along Richmond Parkway, Risks would decrease in directions further away from Richmond Parkway and away from Pittsburg We counted 10 trucks over a 10-minute period during the afternoon of 112412006, which equates to about 60 trucks per hour. Pace 16 L\Nove\Initial Study&Mitioated Negative Declaration',10/18/2006 Avenue, Based UDDn the current desion of the project, all of the home sites have exposures of less than 10 in one million under 30- or 70-vear exposure periods.` The pattern for high exposures is attributable to orevaiiino winds that are almost parallel from the south and the higher emission rates caused bV trucks Idllno or acCeierating near the intersection, This analysis assumed a credible worst-case scenario where truck traffic would increase along Richmond Parkway. The predicted risk would be lower if truck traffic would remain nearly constant or decrease. For example, assuming constant 2001 truck traffic would reduce the 70-vear risk by 26%0 and the 30-vear risk by 1 8% (an insignificant level). The BAAQMD recommends use of a cancer risk factor of 3 x. 10"4 cancer cases per pglm� of diesel particulate matter (i.e., 70-year exposure), which are based on "best estimates" of plausible cancer potencies as determined by the California Office Of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Typically, the BAAQMD apply these criteria to new sources of toxic air contaminant emissions. This impact means that a new resident living at the project and spending much of their entire lifetime (70 years) at their residence could increase their chance of contracting cancer by up to 20 chances in a million from exposure to diesel exhaust emitted from nearby trucks. The actual change in their risk would be dependent on the alternative environment that they would live. For example, a person moving from a heavily urbanized or industrialized area could reduce their chances of contracting-cancer due to a lower overall exposure. Under the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, an incremental risk of.greater than ten cases per million at the Maximally Exposed Individual or MEI (in this case being proposed- residences near Richmond Parkway) would result in a significant impact. This project as designed will not reach this significance threshold. Refer to Mitigation Measures I1l.a.2 and a.3. Mitigation Measures Ill.d. None Required. Impact Ill.e.: Odors. Less Than Significant with Mitigation The proposed project is residential development, and therefore, would not be considered to create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of peopie. However, existing sources of odors located within the project area may affect residents that would occupy the proposed project. Potential sources of odors in the project area include the West County integrated Resource Recovery facility (adjacent to the site), the West County Wastewater District's a wastewater treatment facility to the northwest, West Contra Costa County Sanitary Landfill to the northwest and Chevron Refinery. along with General Chemical to the south and southwest. There are other industrial uses and commercial Garden nurseries in the area that may result in odors at times that affect the site. Figure 4 is a wind rose for the Chevron Refinery Meteorological Station adjacent to San Francisco Bay. This plot is used to describe wind flow in the region. Prevailing The project was redesigned in 2006 (from the original application dated August 2005) in order to provide a buffer along Richmond Parkway that serves as mitigation to potential air quality impacts. Page i 7 L:\NoveVnitia Study&Mitigated Negative Dectaration 1 1oil B/2006. - winds at the Chevron site are from the south-southeasterly directions, likely influenced by the close proximity to nearby terrain and the bay. Southerly winds are usually common with the intrusion of marine air throuch San Francisco Bay into Sam Pablo Bay and the Carquine_ Straits. Stormy patterns in the winter also bring southeri y winds, but those occurrences are considerably less. West to northwest winds ocal r primarily in winter and spring. Northerly or easterly winds are most common in winter. Southerly winds occur most often, which is about half of the time. The West County Resource Recovery Facility (IRRF) is located immediately adjacent to the eastern site boundary. Operations at this facility includematerial resource recovery from waste, waste transfer station, public buyback/drop-off center, and a household hazardous.waste collection facility. The current facility is permitt ed to handle 1,200 tons per day, although current activity is much less (Bulk Materials DEiR). Primary operations at this facility would be about 50D feet from the nearest residences. The BAAQMD recommends, as a project screening distance, thh at residences and these,types of facilities be separated by 1 mile. However, wsind flow from the IRRF to the project only occurs about 10% of the time (i.e., occurrE.-_ nce of east-southeast through east-northeast winds). Therefore, frequent objectior-iable odors are unlikely if the IRRF is operated in accordance with the facility odor control plan. The West County Wastewater District wastewater treatment plant is located about 0.3 to 0.5 miles northwest of the site. Wastewater treatment plants are a period is source of odors. Plant operators typically employ measures to reduce odors and have odor control plans. The proposed project would be the closest residences to this facility. The BAAQMD recommends a project screening distance of 1 mile between residences and wastewater treatment facilities. Winds from the west-northwest through north, the general direction of the facility, occur about 18% of the time. Winds are fairly strong about half the time that they are blowing from these directions, which would result in considerable mixing so that odors would probably not be detectable or at least readily noticeable to cause complaints. Therefore, wind flow that could result in odors would occur less than 10% of the time. As a result, frequent obiectionabie odors a re unlikely if the wastewater treatment facilities are operated in accordance with the facility odor control plans. The West Contra Costa County Sanitary Landfill (WCCSL) is located about 0.6 miles to the northwest of the site. The facility is transitioning from a traditional sanitary landfill, to a facility that has other operations that can cause odors: • Composting operation that is permitted to handle up to 450 ton s per day of composting materials that include food waste, green waste, and construction debris; • Waste recycling and wood recovery; • Soi! remediation and reciamatlon; and • Biosolids/dredged materials spreading. Under the recently amended Land Use Permit (No. 2054-92); the facility is required to operate in a manner that odors would not be detected offsite. Odor complaints would FaQe 1 E i ANove\Initial studv&Midaated NeOative Declaration 10/18/2006 V be investigated and remedies imposed within 2 working days. Otherwise, the County has the authority to cease operations at par or all of the facility in order to control odors. The BAAQMD recommends a project screenino distance of 1 mile between residences and sanitary landfill facilities. The same screening distance is used for composting operations. Wind conditions are similar to that of the wastewater treatment facilities (described above) where the wind blows from the WCCSL facility to the site about 10% of the time. Frequent odor-related .nuisances are unlikely at the project site since the facility has an odor control plan in place and there is a low occurrence of winds blowing from the direction of the facility. The Chevron Refinery and General Chemical are located approximately 1.5 miles south-southwest of the proposed project. Both facilities are sources of odors. Substances present in refinery air emissions, such as hydrogen sulfide (H-,S), benzene compounds, acrolein, naphthalene, phenol, methyl mercaptan, SO2, and toluene, are known to cause unpleasant odors. The odor from some of these compounds can be detected, even when their concentrations are very low (e.g., HS). The BAAQMD recommends a project screening distance of 2 miles between residences and refineries and one mile between residences and chemical manufacturing plants. Chevron Refinery is one of the largest refineries in the Bay Area. Winds typically blow from the southerly directions, especially during late spring and summer months. The Wind Rose for the Chevron Refinery meteorological station indicates southerly winds (i.e. south- southeast to southwest) about 50% of the time. in addition to odors, the proposed project may be subject to impacts from these facilities during upset conditions. There is a potential for odors based on proximity to both Chevron Refinery and General Chemical and the prevailing wind conditions that would transport odors in the direction of the proposed project. Operation of the facilities described above are subject to the BAAQMD Regulation 7 - Odorous Substances. Any member of the public can make an odor complaint. The BAAQMD has a toll-free phone number for receiving complaints made by the public. If a BAAQMD inspector confirms an odor complaint, a notice of violation would be issued to the offending facility. After issuance of three or more notices of violation, the BAAQMD would take action to require the operators to abate the situation. In summary, the project would be downwind of a potential source of odors approximately 50% of the time and subject to odors when the refineries or chemical plants' odor control plans are ineffective. As.a result, objectionable odors are likely to be experienced from time to time. Whether or not these odors would result in widespread complaints from the project is speculative. However, complaints are possible, and therefore the impact is considered potentially significant. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce the impact to less than significant. Mitigation Measure 11i.d.: Concurrently,with the recordation of the Final Map, record a statement to run with the deeds to the property notifying future occupants, of the project that they may experience odors due to their proximity to facilities that result in such odors. In addition, provide comparabie notification in the CC&Rs for the proiect. information regarding the sources of odors and actions that citizens can take (e.g., phone numbers for reporting complaints) shall be provided. Pace 19 :V,goveUnitia!Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration'•.10/18/200- Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the f=inal map t he Contra Costa County Development Department shall review the Real =state Ciisclosures (for sale and/or rental) to ensure that this disclosure is includes. Sianificance After Mitiaatior: Less Than Significant. Page20 LANovelfnitial Study Mitigated Negative Deciaration\1011612006 i Potentially Significant Potentially 1, Unless Less That, Significant ; Mitigation Significant No lmoact Incorporated i Impact 1 Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would i the project: ! ! i � I a. Have a substantial adverse effect, I I i >; i either directly or through habitat ( f modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, ! f I or special status species in local or ! regional pians, policies, or I regulations, or by the California ! Department of Fish and game or I i U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? I (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, and 17a I ? I hand b) i � I b. Have a substantial adverse effect on i x i any riparian habitat or other 1 1 sensitive natural community I identified in local or regional plans, , policies, and regulations or by the i California Department of Fish and I ; Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1 ! Service? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, ! 1 , and 17a and b) I c. I Have a substantial adverse effect on Y, ! federaliv protected wetlands as i defined by Section 404 of the Clean ! ! Water Fact (including, but, not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other ; means? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, and 17a and b) d. interfere substantially with the I >; { movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or 1 { j migratory wildlife corridors, or ! I impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Sources 1, 2. 3, 4, !. 5a-c, and 17a and b) ' e. I Conflict with any local policies or X I Iordinances protecting biological I i resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Sources 1. 21 4, 5a-c, and 17a and 17b) Faae '1 L:\Hove\initial Stuoy Miticated Necative Declaration',10/18/2006 Potentially Significant I Potentiahv i 6niess Less Tha in Sianificant Mitigation Significant No imnac, incorporated impact impact Conflict witn the orovisions oi an >; adopted Habitat Conservation Pian, j Natural Community Conservation j i Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat j conservation plan? (Sources 1; 2, 1 3, 4, 5a-c, and 17a and b) Preface In 2005 LSA completed an arborists report for the site. In 2006 they compie ted a Biological Reconnaissance Survey. Impact IVa. - d. and- f.: Species, Riparian, Wetlands, Corridors, Conservation Plans. No impact. The biological resources reconnaissance determined th at the site contains no habitat for any rare, threatened, or endangered plants or animals. The Wildcat Creek corridor supports the only native habitat in the vicinity of the site. The north bank of the creek, which is adjacent to the site, is maintained for f food control purposes. There is no woody vegetation present on it, and this zone , which is kept free of woody vegetation, extends out onto the overflow terrace of the creek. The project site contains no areas of biological concern subject to the jurisdi ction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 Clean Water Act), Regional \Nater Quality Control Board (Section 401 Clean Water Act or Porter-Cologne), or California Department of Fish and Game (Section 1600 Fish and Game Code). The Proposed Projct will not be expected to interfere substantially with the movement of wildlife nor impede use of any wildlife nurseries, or result in a substantial loss of wildlife habitat. No fishery resources or important nursery areas would be affected. The Proposed Project would conform to relevant policies in the Contra Costa County General Plan. The Proposed Pro iect would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved conservation pian as no conservation pians have been adopted encompassing the project and any other areas within the vicinity of the site, therefore, no impact is anticipated. Mitigation Measure IV.a. - d. and f.: None Required. imcact IV.e.: Trees, Less Than Significant. The tree survey counted 187 trees on the perimeter of the property and no trees within the interior of the proiect site. A total of 121 of the 187 surveyed trees were located outside the project boundary. Some of these trees may be impacted by project construction. Trees along Pittsburg Avenue Page 22 L:\NoveVnitia! Study&Mitigated Neoative Declaration\10/18/2006 - are within the project boundary. Two of the surveyed trees within the proie vt are larae specimen trees. On the western and southern property boundaries are trees with trunks outside the project boundary. Portions of the canopies of some of these trees extend into the project area. Along the southern boundary but off-site is a row of native trees that appear to be mitigation trees planted to enhance the Wildcat Creek corridor. These closely spaced trees have been heavily pruned, perhaps to minimize shadin g to nursery stock. The Preliminary Site Plan indicates that the 64 trees along the south side of Pittsburg Avenue are within the project boundary. High voltage distribution lines run above most of these trees. The presence ofthese wires affects ,the tops of most of the blue aum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globules) trees present here because of the pruning which is occurring to maintain the ten foot clearance required by PG&E. The two large specimen trees are west of the entrance gate; one is a red willow which is approximately 45 feet tall with a 45 inch diameter comprised of two trunks. The second is a large blue gum eucalyptus located in the northwest corner of the project site. The overall condition of all trees along Pittsburg Avenue is fair to good depending on intensity and amount of transmission line clearance pruning. Any planned removal of trees adjacent to or underneath the high voltage wires will require coordination with PG&E. Based on a review of the preliminary site plan, a total of 64 trees are listed for removal, including five Monterey Pine and 53 Eucalyptus, two coast live oaks (diameter's are less than 6.5"), and four red willow. Based upon Section 8 of the County Code, the removal of the four red willow shall be permitted as they are not in a stand of four or more. The removal of the eucalyptus shall be permitted because they are species known to develop weaknesses that affect the health of the tree or the safety of people and property. The two coast live oaks are only 1" and 3" in diameter and do not meet the county's size for preservation. The Monterey Pines are not protected trees. impacts to trees are considered a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.e.: None Required. P a a e 23 :\Nove\ImfiP! Swov Mitioated Negative Deciaration 10/18/200E Potentialiv Sian if i cant 1 Potentially I Unless Less ThEk in Sianifizan', Miticiation Sianificar-il, No IMDBC:t incorporated Impact impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project'. a. i Cause a substantial adverse change X in.the significance of a historic resource as defined in 15064.5? I (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 7) b. I Cause a substantial adverse change i X in the significance of an archaeoioglcal resource pursuant to I 15064.5? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 7) c. Directly or indirectly destroy a I I X unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? I ( ! j 1 (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 6 7) d. Disturb any human remains, i X including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 7) Preface In 2005 LSA Completed a Cultural Resources Survey of the Nove Site. The study consisted of background research, which included a literature review and a records search at the Northwest Information Center, consultation with potentially interested parties and a field survey. Impact V.a. - d.: Historic, Archaeological, Paleontolical and Human Resources. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project iect location is highly sensitive for subsurface prehistoric archaeological resources. The San Pablo land grant boundaries (land grant boundary follows the historic shoreline) as depicted in the Richmond, California (United States Geological Survey 1995) 7.5 topographic quadrang; ie, Preliminary Map of Historic Margins of Marshland San Francisco Bay, California (Nichols and Wright 1971), and Flatiand Deposits-Their Geology and EngineBring Properties and Their Importance to Comprehensive Planning (Helly et al, 1979), .indi--ate that the prehistoric San Pablo Creek, is approximately 1 ,500 feet to the north. Numerous prehistoric archaeological sites throughout the San Francisco Bay Area have been identified adjacent to the historic shoreline at or near the mouth of freshwater drainages. Two such sites, CA-CCO-2372 and -266, are approximately one- mile to the north of the sub'iect property. Six additional prehistoric sites are near Wildcat and San Pablo Creeks, within approximately one-mile of the project location. On January 14, 2005, LSA sent a letter and maps depicting the pro'iect location to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requesting a review of their sacred Pacie 24 L:\Nove\initial Study Mitigated Negative Deciaration',10/1812006 lands file for any Native American cultural resources that miaht be affected by the Proposed Project. Ms. Debbie Piias-Treadway, NAHC Environmental Specialist III, responded in a `axed letter dated January 21 , 200=. (sic), that the sacred lands file showed no known Native American sites that might be affected by the proposed project. On January 14, 2005, LSA sent a letter and maps depicting the project location to the Richmond Museum of History. On January 21 , 2004 (sic), LSA contacted the Richmond Museum of History by phone and the Museum expressed no concerns regarding historical sites within or adjacent to the project location. This study identified no cultural resources within or adjacent to the project location. This location is, however, sensitive for prehistoric archaeological sites and monitoring during ground disturbing activities is recommended. The following mitigations will reduce these potential impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measure V.a. - d.: Since this area is highly sensitive for prehistoric archaeological resources, it is recommended that any ground disturbance below the imported fill be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. Archaeological monitors shall be empowered to halt construction activities at the location of a discovery to review possible archaeological material and to protect the resource while the finds are being evaluated. This monitoring shall continue until, in the archaeologist's judgment, cultural resources are not likely to be encountered. If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery should be redirected until the archaeological monitor evaluates the situation and provides recommendations. If archaeological deposits cannot be avoided, the archaeologist will evaluate the resources to determine if they are significant under CEQA. If the deposits are significant, the archaeologist shall prepare and implement a data recovery program as approved by the County. Responsibility and Monitoring: The Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall require that the recommendations of the archeologist for the mitigation of adverse effects are followed by the project applicant. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. Paae 25 LANave\tnitia!Swav&Mittuated Neaauve DecmmuoW10f1UMDE, Potentially Significant i I Potentially i Unless Less That n Significant Mitigation Sicinifica nt No imoact incorporated imoact imoact Vl. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the '� project: a. Expose people or structures to potential j j substantial adverse effects, including j the risk or Foss, iniury, or death, I involving: (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 18, 19, 20 & 21) _ I i. Rupture of a known earthquake Y, fault, as delineated on the most i recent Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer ; If to the Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 18, 19, 20 & 21) I ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? X 1 (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 18, 19, 4 20 & 21 1 iii. Seismic-related ground failure, X including liquefactions? (Sources I 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 18, 19, 20 & 21) j i j iv. Landslides? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, i x I 5a-c, 18, 19. 20 & 21) I b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the j l ii ! X loss of topsoil? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a- I j c, 18,•19, 20 & 21) I i c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil X I i I that is unstable, or that would become j i unstable as a result of the project, and j potentially result in on- or off-site j j landslide, lateral spreading, I I I subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? j 1 (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 18, 19, 20 & 21) 1 i d. i Be located on expansive soil, as ` X defined in Table 1 B-1-B of the Uniform J Building Code (1994), creative 4 substantial risks to life or property? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 18, 19, 20 & 21) e. Have soils incapable of adequately 1 >; supporting the use of septic tanks or I I alternative waste disposal systems j where sewers are not available for the i disposal of waste water? (Sources 1, ! Page 26 L:\Nove\Initial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration\10/1812006 Potentially Significant Potentials}, Unless Less Than ' Significant Mitigation Sian ificant No impact incorporated I=ac irnaact 18, 1°, 20 21) Preface The site is approximately 1 .75 miles southwest of the active Hayward fault which is capable of a magnitude of 7.1 and peak around acceleration at the site of 0.61 g. According to the North Richmond Planned District Map, the site is located in an area of "high to moderate" liquefaction potential. The soils on the site are considered to be "moderately expansive" by the Soils Survey of Contra Costa County (1977). Such soils require special foundation design measures to avoid/minimize the damage potential. According to mapping of the U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 96-98, the site is underlain by fine-grained basin deposits of Holocene age (Qhb). However, interbedded fluvial deposits that consist of sands or sandy silts, if present, could have a high liquefaction potential. ENGEO, Inc., geotechnical consultants, performed an investigation to evaluate potential geotechnical hazards and provide criteria and standards to guide site grading drainage and foundation design. The scope of subsurface investigation included logging of seven rotary wash borings (ranging from approximately 37 to 60 feet deep), along with laboratory testing of selected samples, and analysis 35 CPT probes. The data gathered indicate that the site is mantled by gray silty clay that ranges from "very soft" to "medium firm." Based on borehole logs, this layer ranges up to 13 feet in thickness. It is underlain by stiff, sandy and silty clay that is interbedded with sands that are described as "loose" to "medium dense" and saturated. Locally, silty sands extend from the surface a depth of 34 feet (Boring B-2, logged 12119/03). This report is available for review at the County offices. imicact VI.a.i.. ii. and iii.: Earthquake, Ground Shaking and Liquefaction. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The ENGEO conclusions and recommendations may be summarized as follows: • Groundwater. The water table is 1 to 6 feet below the surface. • Liquefaction. ENGEO considers the sands to be liquefiable and recommends measures to mitigate liquefaction in the northwest portion of the site. • Basin Deposits. The weak and highly compressible silty ciays are subject to 12 to 14 inches of"primary" settlement due to the civil grading needed to elevate the project site to provide for adequate sewer and storm drainage flows and estimated residential building loads, causing damage to improvements. Secondary consolidation may begin at the end of the primary consolidation phase, and amount to '/< to 1 inch over a 30 to 50 year period. To minimize Paae 27 :1Nove\initial Study&Mitigated Negative Decia.ation 10/1812006 after-construction settlement, cNuE:O recommends a surcharge program consisting of fill placement (probably in combination with vertical wick drains'). Placing temporary surcharge fills on the site is intended to result in a portion of the total settiement occurring before buildmo, construction and will min 1 mile the after-construction settlement. ScecfflC criteria are provided for the thl=:Kness of the surcharae fill and anticipated settlement as a function of the thickn ess of the soft clays. These impacts could be significant unless mitigated. Mitigation Measure VI.a.i., ii. and iii.: The Oroiect shall comply with -the specific standards and criteria for use in design and construction of the proieci (site grading, drainage and foundation design) .as identified in the cNC�-==_O report. Responsibility and Monitoring: The Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the Development Plans prior to issuance of a grading permit. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. impact VI.a.iii. and c.: Ground Shaking and Unstable Soils. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Loose to medium dense sand were penetrated in most borings and CPT probes. The sands were up to 34 feet thick in one boring, hut.were typically 5 feet or less in thickness. The geometry of the sand body is not established by the borehole data. It may be a channel sand, a longshore bar or a layer Df sand. There are two hazards posed by liquefaction: a) different settlement, and b) failure of the Wildcat Creek levee (i.e., if sand "daylights" on the creek bank or just bel ow the floor of the Wildcat Creek channel, there may be potential for failure of the embankment, possibly affecting adjacent lands within the subdivision). The clayey surface soils have a low permeability, the water table is shallow, and there is a potential for foundation damage if ponding or saturation of foundation so ils occur. Saturation, if it occurs, will cause foundation soils to swell, with consequent I oss of strength, and movement of the foundation and slabs. However, the Prolect Sponsors have submitted additional geotechnical information that provides additional s ubsurface data along the creek embankment to evaluate the geometry and thickness of the sand and assessment of the associated hazard. This report determines that the likelihood of damaging deformations (beyond those anticipated by building codes. for strong ground shaking) from lateral spreading is low at the site if the following mitigations are undertaken. Mitigation Measure VI.a.iii, and c.: Prior to the issuance of building permits provide the following where possible under C-3 requirements and subject to mitication measures set forth in Section VIII: • Criteria and standards for rapid removal of surface water runoff foundation systems: Page 28 L ANove\Initial study&Mitigated Negative Declaration 10/18/2006 All surface water should be collected and discharged into a storm drainage system, including rear yards (area drains). The use of catch basin Inserts, vegetated swales or biofilters, rOOf runoff controls, or permeable parking areas shall be used to collect, fi Iter, and reduce the amount of pollutants entering the stormwater system. E CC&P.'s shall address the need to limit irrigation and include an appropriate landscape planting pallet. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to filing the Final Map, the Contra Costa County's Consulting Geologist and Grading Division of County Building inspection Department shall review the Final Development Plans to ensure the recommendations have been complied with. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. impact Vi.a.iv. and h.: Landslides and Soil Erosion. No Impact. The site is relatively fiat, therefore, there is limited potential for landsliding, a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measure VI.a.iv., and b.: None Required. impact VI.d.: Expansive Soils. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. A surcharge is proposed by the Project Sponsor as a measure to mitigate the primary consolidation of soft clays. However, the monitoring of consolidation is not clearly indicated. There are up to 13 feet of soft compressible soils on the site. ENGEO, Inc., estimates that placing fill on the site (to elevate the property above the flood plain in combination with the weight of improvement) will trigger significant settlement. The fill thickness anticipated on the site range up to 6 feet. ENGEO estimates that primary settlement (due to the site grading and improvements) will range up to 14 inches. Additionally, through time the alluvial deposits on the site will experience secondary compression settlement to range from 11�4 to 1 inches. An estimated 90% of the primary settlement will occur over 12 to 24 months. The secondary compression settlement is expected to gradually occur over the next 30 to 50 years (the secondary settlement must be considered for gravity flow facilities, street drainage, storm drain culverts, and sanitary sewers). ENGEO provides a table that relates thickness of the surcharge fill to settlement but the duration of the surcharge is not prescribed. ENGEO, Inc., reviewed the proposed surcharge plan and estimated settlements provided in the referenced geotechnical report. In that report, ENGEO, Inc. recommends a surcharge fill height of 5 feet or less and have predicted settlement of up to approximately 14 inches. Based on ENGEO's experience with construction and performance of surcharge fills, and since the surcharae fill will be at a height no .greater than 5 feet and be sloped with.the toe of slope at or within the property line (not within roadway right-of-ways), ENGE O anticipates that the lateral extent of impact from a 5-foot surcharge fill will be negligible. This can be verified through monitoring Paae 29 L:\Hove\Initial Study&Mitigated(Negative Declaration'•,10118/2000 v of horizontal and vertical survev control points established within the roadway right-o ways. This is a potentiaify significant impact. Mitigation Measure VLd.: Subsequent to imolementin❑ the or000sed surcharge program, the Project Sponsor shall provide the foliowlnai • Details of surcharge monitoring by ENG7EO and materials (and technical data) in a grading completion report. • Topographic survey map after placement of surcharge. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to filing the final map, the Proj ect Sponsor shall provide the Contra Costa County Community Development Department with additional surcharge details. This information shall b e subject to the review and approval by the County Geologist at the Project Spo nsor's expense. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. impact VI.e.: Wastewater Disposal. No Impact. The project will be served by public service and therefore soil suitability related to septic or alternative waste disposal systems in not an impact. Mitigation Measure VI.e.: None Required. Paoe 30 L:1Novellnibal Studv&Mitieated Necative Declaration 1D/1812006 Potentially Significant Potentially finless Less Tha n Sionificant Mitigation Significant , No Impact ! incorporated Impact I imaact Vll. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS i i MATERIALS — Would the project: i a. I Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 12) b. Create a significant hazard to the I i X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the , I release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 12) c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle ` X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? i (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 12) I ! d. Be located on a site which is X j I included on a -list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 56862.5 and, as a result, would it create a i i i significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Sources 1, 2, 3, j 4. 5a-c & 12) I i e. ! For a project located within an X airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within I two miles of a public airport or i I public use airport, would the proiect result in a safety hazard for people ' residing or working in the project I i ; area? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & ! i 12) f. 1 For a proiect within the vicinity of a I X private airstrip, would the proiect result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the proiect area? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 'r2) j g. Impair implementation of or ); physically interfere with an adopted emergency response pian or emergency evacuation plan? ! Page "I') L:\Nove\Initial Study&Mitigated Nepauve Deciaration',10/1812006 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Thar-z Significant Mitigation Sionifican rt No impact incorporated impact imoact (Sources 1, 2, 3, ', 5a-c & 12) h. Expose people or structures to a ): f significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, j jincluding where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed j with wildlands? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 12) i Impact Vll.a. and b.: Transport, or Expose to People to Hazardous Waste. Less Than Significant. The Proposed Project is a residential project and therefore the transport, use, disposal or accidential release of hazardous materials is limited to normal residential uses and landscaping needs. Normal waste disposal will preclude disposal of any significant quantities. This is not an impact. The detected concentration of endoculfan sulfate in one of the 12 samples tasted exceeds the screening value. Treadwell & Rollo believe that this result represents an- isolated condition and does not indicate a requirement for remediation. The results of the RCRA 8 Metals suggest that soil excavated from the subject can be handled as non-hazardous. However, this investigation could not evaluate the entire area of the nursery, and therefore localized areas may contain higher concentrations of residual chemicals of concern than reported and evaluated here. Based on the available information, it appears that potential offsite sources of soil and shallow groundwater contamination have not affected the Color Spot Nursery, a less than sianificant impact. Mitigation Measure Vll.a. and b.: None Required. impact Vll.c.: Proximity to Schools. No impact. The site is located over 113 of a mile from Verde School, the closest school. Therefore, there is no impact identified with potential exposure of any hazardous materials to a school population, a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measure Vll.c.: None Required. impact Vll.d.: Listed Sites. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The site is not on .any list of hazardous materials sites; however, there are underground storage tanks (USTs) on the site. Treadwell & Rolio has completed a Phase Il ESA for the site. Because of the types of activities commonly associated with commercial nurseries, residual concentrations of pesticides, herbicides, and petroleum hydrocarbons in the PaQe 32 L:\Nove\lnitiai 5tudv Mitioated Necative Declaration ,1011E/2005 shallow soil and/or groundwater was a concern. Their investigation detected minor concentrations of several of these organic compounds in the soil and shaliow oroundwater. This is a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure Vll.d.: Before site development begins, existing USTs should be prcperiv closed and removed. Typically, USTs either have I eaks or spills associated with their use. This current investigation "tested soil and groundwater in the vicinity of known or suspected USTs, and detected only minor concentrations. However, Signature Properties should anticipate some soil remediation (by over-excavation) will be required when closing the USTs. The appropriate method of disposal for that soil will depend on the Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations measured at that time. If the proposed site development plans require significant soil excavation and offsite disposal, additional soil sampling may be warranted to further characterize the soil for reuse or disposal. Should that occur, Treadwell & Rollo should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be mad e. Facilities receiving soil excavated from this site during construction shall require additional testing specific to their permit or land-use requirements (at the discretion of the Environmental Assessor). Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the grading plan the Project Sponsors shall provide evidence to the Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator that all USTs have been closed and no further analysis is required. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. Impact Vll.e. and f.: Airport Safety Hazards. No impact. The site is not within one mile of an airfield and therefore no impact will occur. Mitigation Measure Vll.e. and f.: None Required. impact Vll.c. and h.: Emergency Evacation or Wiidiand Fires. No Impact, The site will not interfere with any emergency evacation plans nor is it near any wildland area that would be subject to fires, therefore, no impact is expected. Mitigation Measure Vll.g. and h.: None Required. Facie 33 :\Nove\iniUa! Stuav Mitigated Neaaiive Declaration 1DI1812006 |� � Sion if ican, Potnn1ia|\y Un\oss . Loss Thao ! n'pnif|canf. Mitigation Significan—t No ' d ` \ Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a. I Violate any water quality standards i X I or waste discharge requirements? ' I b. Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ^ Substantially alter the e^=""g drainage patterns of the site or area, including through the alteration of� the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in i substantial erosion or siltation on- or ` ! ' d. Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, \ | inu|udin�through the alteration of �h f 1 e course o � stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or ' . amount ofsurface runoff m a � \' mannorwhich would ranu|1 in flooding on- or offl-site? (Sources 1, e. Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water' ' \ dramageaysien�s or provide | � subotonba| oddiiiona| sourcea of i pollutedrunoff? (Sources 1_2. 3. 4. f. Otherwise substantially degrade X water quality? (Sources 1, 21 ` Pags34 L:\Novexnitml Studv Miticiated Necative Decarauon1011812006 ' ( Potentially Sianificant Potentially Unless Less Than i Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Incorporated impact Impact g. Place housing within a 1 DO-vear >: i flood hazard area as mapped on a l j Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or i Flood Insurance Rate Map or other j flood hazard delineating map? i (Sources 1. 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 9, 18, 19, i 20, 21 & 23) h. j Place within a 100-year flood hazard I X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Sources 1, ! i 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 9, 18, 19, 20, 21 & 23) I i. I Expose people or structures to a ! X j significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including I l flooding as a result of the failure of i I j a levee or dam? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 9, 18, 19, 20, 21 & 23) i j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or i ; X mudflow? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 9, 18, 19, 20, 21 & 23) Preface in 2005 Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar & Associates completed a Draft Stormwater Control Plan for the Nove Subdivision which they updated in September, 2006. . The existing site has been used as a flower growing operation for many years. Topographically it is in a general relatively flat area with a slight, though gentle, slope from east to west. Existing site drainage is over land and drains to an existing ditch along the westerly boundary, which discharges to the existing storm drains in Pittsburg Avenue. There is an existing 4E" storm drain in Pittsburg Avenue that drains in a westerly direction crossing Richmond Parkway and eventually into the Bay. impact Vlll.a., c.. d.. e. and f.: Water Quality, Alternation of Drainage CC)UrseS or Increased Runoff, increased Impervious Surfaces. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Water Quality Due to the nature of this proposed high density type of development, the existing clayey native soils and high groundwater table, the use of post construction Best Management Practices (BMP) are being utilized to the maximum extent possible. The site design has many constraints but is maximizing opportunities to utilize pervious surface, landscape/open space and park area to minimize the effect of impervious areas. Page 35 _:\Nove\initial Swdv&Mitiaated Negative Decaraticn 10/16/2006 - The most serious constraints are the existing clavey soils, hydrologic Group C/D. This site will incorporate a vast majority of Import materials as fill, raising the finis h grade. By importing fill and creating additional depth to the seasonal aroundwater table, infiltration and treatment of SMP will be more effective. Pili will vary in deptri from feet on the south section of the site to a depth of 1-foot to the north. The Stormwater Control Pian is intended to deliver all surface flows to the detention basin prior to entering the conveyance system. The detention basin is intended to serve as both a detention and water quality basin. By implementing a design approach that. utilizes the site gravity, the general runoff will be to the north. No runoff conveyance systems will be directly emptied to Wildcat Creek; however, the open space along Wildcat Creek (Lot A) will be utilized for runoff flow to grassy swrales prior to entering the storm drain system. All site drainage systems will go to the e xisting 4E" diameter storm drain located in Pittsburg Avenue. The majority of the site's future impervious area is roof area and street pavin g that will generate quick runoff. The storm runoff from the impervious surface will be conveyed by a network of underground storm drains to the downstream water quality basin. The storm runoff will be detained in the basin to allow pollutants to settle prior to entering into the off site public storm drain system. The detention basin will drain within seventy-two hours, reducing vector concerns. The driveway courts are proposed as pervious pavers and thereby minimizing polluted stormwater flows. Some of the lots (G-M, Q, Sand T) will maximize the use of grassy swales and biD-retention in the open space areas. Stormwater Runoff The project proposes to collect stormwater throughout the site via a system of inlets, storm drains, and grassy swales and convey the drainage to a proposed detention/water quality basin at the northwest corner of the property. The intent of the proposed detention basin is to regulate the drainage flow before being conve-yed to existing storm drain systems at the northwest corner of the intersection of Ri chmond Parkway and Pittsburgh Avenue (Line C of Drainage Area 19A). The County Ordinance Code requires all stormwater entering and/or originating on this property to be collected and conveyed without diversion and within an adequate storm a r-ainage 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. Unless mitigated, potential impacts to the storm drainage systems and water quality could be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure Vlll.a., c., d., e. and f.-1.: Measures to Limit Imperviousness and Manage Runoff. As the site is proposed to be a dense infill development, the following measures shall be incorporated to reduce impervious surfaces and to ensure adequate collection of stormwater runoff: Paas 36 L:\Nove\initial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration ,1011812006 Water Quality 1. Provide a Stormwater Control Plan that addresses the specific reauirements of the Countv s Stormwater Management and Discharge Ordinance, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook criteria, and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards requirements. 2. Minimization of streets and roads. 3. Maximization of open space for landscaping and recreation. 4. Open space areas (throughout the site) shall serve as tot lots and/or landscaping. 5. Pervious pavers shall be utilized to the maximum extent feasible. 6. Disconnected downspouts shall positively drain from splash block to landscaped areas, wherever feasible. 7. The project shall verify the adequacy of the detention/water quality basin and demonstrate that the existing downstream drainage system(s) that receives stormwater runoff from this project is adequate to convey the required design storm (based on the size and ultimate development .density within the contributing watershed) and, if necessary, construct improvements including alternative methods such as grassy swales to guarantee adequacy. The project shall obtain access rights to make any necessary improvements to off-site facilities. 8. The DA 19A Hydrology Map (Drawing FD-12425 dated November 30, 19B4) assumes an ultimate density of 7 du/acre as opposed to the 13 du/acre assumed by this project. In order to determine the possible impacts to downstream facilities due to a higher volume of runoff associated with the increased density, a hydrology study shall be submitted to the. County and the District for review prior to approving the improvement plans. Alternatively, the project shall be required to mitigate flow rates down to the density levels anticipated in the DA 19A Hydrology Map. 9. The project shall be required to obtain a Flood Control Encroachment Permit. 10. The project shall ensure that the HOA or other entity shall be responsible for maintenance of the stormwater facilities. 11. The Landscape Plan calls out a "Connection to Existing Trail." This access point shall be approved by the Flood Control, District and the EBRPD. Mitigation Measure Vlll.a., c., d., e. and f.-2.: Selection and Primary Design of Stormwater Treatment BMP. Impervious areas on the site, including all Pa4e 37 L:\NDVe\initial Swdv&Wiaated Neaative Deciaration 1011812006 roofs, parking areas, and driveways have been divided into district drainage areas as shown on the Stormwater Control Pian. Runoff from each of these areas is proposed to be conveyed Via storm drains to the detention ba sin. Grassy swales shall be located in the open space lots and paseo area: s between the townhomes. All of the arassy swales shall feature a minimum 12" depth of sandy loam material (minimum infiltration rate specified to be 5 inches per hour). Specific drainage areas and swales are shown in the Stormwater Control Plan and shall show the pervious and impervious area calculations. The construction-related activities that could result in water quality impacts, will need to be mitigated.by the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Mitigation Measure Vlll.a., c., d., e. and f.-3.: The project shall conf orm to the Source Control Measures, BMP Measures and Construction Plan C.3 Checklist, a SWPPP, and other water quality control measures as determined Contra Costa County. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the final development plans, the Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall ensure that the mitigations identified in the Hydrology study and the Stormwater Control Plan be included in the project pians and appropriate setbacks are in place and that the Contra Costa County Community Development Department shall o nsure that the appropriate agencies, which could include the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Quality Division [CCCFD & WQD], Contra Costa County Department of.Public Works [DWP], United States Army Corps of Engineers Operation Division Review [USACE] and the Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB] have reviewed and approved the plans. Prior to the filing of the Final Map of the Contra Costa County Community Development Department will ensure that drainage fees have been co Ilected. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. impactVlll.b.: Ground Water:.-No impact. While the project will result in i M'Dervious surfaces, due to C.3 requirements, there are pervious pavers and other measures incorporated into the project design that provides infiltration. However, most importantly, this area is not designated as a primary aquifer recharge area. Mitigation Measure Vlll.b.: None Required. impact Vlil.c., In. and i.: Flooding. Less Than Significant.. k.ccording to r==_MA s Digital Flood Database (F=—Mk, 2004), Wildcat Creek is located within a 100-year flood zone. However, this flood zone does not extend onto the site and the site will be raised by between 3.5 to 1 foot (see discussion of Impact VIII. a., c., d.: e., and f.-I ). The preliminary grading plan does not show a setback distance from the creei, Pape 3B L:\Hove\Initial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration\10/18/2006 however. the closest unit appears to be approximately 40 feet from the top of the creel; bank. County regulations provide recommendations for minimum setback distances only for unimproved earth channels. Because this section of Wildcat Creek; is improved and can contain the 100 vear storm, the creek structure setback: requirements do not apply in this particular case. Unless mitigated, this is a potentially significant impact. imoact VIIIIJ, and i.: Dams and Levee Failures, Tsunami,Seiches, and M udfiows. Less Than Significant. According to the Geotechnical Report, the risk of tsunamis, seiches, or mudfiows is low and there are no dams or levees within the prole ct vicinity; therefore, these risks are not a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure Vlll.i. and }.: None Required. Faae 39 '_:Wove\lnitia?5tudv r Mitieated Iveeative Deciaration\1 0/1 812006 Potentiahy Significant ' ! |X LAND Would � _ � ! — _ -- --- -- _ '--'- � -__ � the pnqao�� � � ' � a. Physically divide an established community? (Sources / 2 b. Conflict with any applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local I coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose I of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Sources 1, c. Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ` ' Preface The Proposed Project will develop the approximately 30 acre site into 370 R*sidentia\ units. The Site is bordered by Richmond Parkway to the west, Pittsburg Avenue to the north, and Wildcat Creek tDthe south. An existing mdUSth8) oorOp|8y (which includes the West County Resource Recovery) is located east of the project site. The existing site has been used as a nursery for many years, and is SU|| operating 8s8 nursery. Topography is in general relatively flat with a gentle slope from east to VvSSL ' Existing site drainage is overland and drains to an existing ditch along the westerly boundory, which discharges to the existing storm drains /n Pittsburg Avenue. TheSite is currently designated as Light industry (L|) and Heavy Industry (H\) under the Contra Cost8 CountyBenerB| Plan and iswithin the Planned Development (P'1) zoning district established for North Richmond. The proposed General p\on rs' designat/on of the site is for Multiple Family Residential ' Medium Density and the proposed zoning is Planned Unit District (P-U. The Proposed Sponsor proposes to develop the project site intO� [ Page4O LANo,exnma/amdv wotioatedwegauveDeoaration10n612006 ' Unit Type Net Density 20 townhom�s 23.i units acre 1110 sinale famiiv homes 26.0 unitsracre 140 condominiums i ZZ.o units acre The townhome development will occupy the westerly portion of the site. The single family development will occupy the central portion of the site. The condominium development will occupy the easterly portion of the site. All vehicular access to the site will be from Pittsburg Avenue. Open space (Lot A, which is approximately 1 .2 acres) is proposed along the southerly portion of the site, and a small park (Lot B, which is approximately 0.5 acres) is proposed at the center of the site. A 40-foot wide landscape buffer area (Lots C, D. & E), are approximately .07 acres and are located along Pittsburg Avenue. in addition, there are two passive sitting areas (Lots N & R, which are approximately 0.1 and 0.2 acres respectively) and are located along the southwesterly portion of the site in the townhome area. Lot F, a 1 .7± acre lot, is located at the northwestern corner of the site and inciudes.walking trails; BBC areas and open grassy areas. Lots G-M and R-T are paseos with walkways and landscaped area. Impact IX.a. and b.: Community Compatibility. Less Than Significant Impact. An amendment to the Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan indicating changes to the Land Use Element and maps would be required. The General Plan Land Use Element would need to re-designate the parcel from Heavy Industry and Light Industry to Multi-Family Residential - Medium Density and allow for the development of the 370 unit project. The re-designation and resulting development would continue the extension of residential development to the north. As this area is in redevelopment and in transition, this change in landscape can be seen as unifying the community, a less than significant impact. The project will require annexation to the West County Wastewater District. Mitigation Measure IX.a. and b.: None Required. imaact IX.c.: Conservation Plan. No impact. The pro iect is not located near any Habitat Conservation Plan, or near a Natural Community Conservation Plan. As it is not near any of these sensitive locations, no impact is expected. Mitigation Measure IX.c.: None Required. Paae 41 L:\Neve\initial 5tudv Mitigated Neaative Deciaration',10/16/2006 ! ' —=—'--t i ' PotonUaUy Un\ass Leas Thar-t Gipnificont . MinOa1mn Signif\can � Nu ' | t ' | d =DaCt iMD2Ci X. MINERAL RIGHTS Would the project: a. I Result in the loss of availability Of a known mineral resource that wou�d be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Sources 2, 33 b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local 1 general plan, specific plan, or other MineralResources. No impact. The site is not in an area of knownmineral resources per the County's General P|an, and therefore no inn pact is anticipated. ' Mitigation Measure X'a. and b.: None Required. ' ` ` ` Pape42 Lovovexnuia| StuuvMitigated Negative Deciaramm ,1011812006 Potentially Sionificant Potentialiy Unless Less Than Sionificant Mitigation Sionificant No I Impact I Incorporated impact Impact Xt. NOISE — Would the project: I a. Exposure of persons to, or I 4 X I ! ! generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5a-c 1 i b. j Exposure of persons to, or I i ( X i generation of, excessive ground i I I I borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? (Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5a- II c. A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5a- I j c) I I d. P, substantial temporary or periodic I X ! ! increase in ambient noise levels in the proiect vicinity above levels I ! existing without the project? , (Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5a-c) e. ; For a proiect located within an airport land use pian, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within I i two milas of a public airport or I public use airport, would the project !, i expose people residing or working ! I in the proiect area to excessive noise levels? (Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5a- i f. For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the•proiect expose people residing or working } i in the proiect area to excessive ; ! noise levels? (Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5a- .i c) Preface Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc., performed an environmental noise study for the project. This analysis was peer reviewed by Illingworth A Rodkin, Inc., in January 2006. The noise environment at the site results primarily from local vehicular traffic along Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. Existing noise levels at the project site range from approximately 57 to 76 DNL. Paae 43 L:\Hove\initia!Studv&Mitigated Negative Declaration 10/1 B/2006 imRact Xl.a.: increased Noise Levels. Less Than Significant With Mitig ation. Residential uses developed at portions of the project site would be exposed to exterior noise levels exceeding the "normally acceptable" noise and land use compat i bility standards presented in the County's General Plan for sinale- and multiple-far-niiy residential land uses. interior noise levels would exceed acceptable levels a t portions of the project site without the incorporation of noise insulation features into the project's design. Future noise levels at the pro iect site are anticipated to increase by about 1 decibel. Future noise levels at outdoor use spaces adjacent to Richmond Parkway are anticipated to range from 74 to 77 DNL. Exterior noise levels at residential D utdoor use areas adjacent to Pittsburg Avenue are anticipated to be approximately 65 DNL. The Noise Element indicates that single-family residential land uses are considered "normally acceptable" in noise environments up to 60 DNL. Multiple-family residential land uses are considered "normally acceptable" in exterior noise environments of 65 DNL or less. Preliminary noise barriers are included in the project design. The final desig in of these barriers has not been completed, but preliminary calculations indicate that noise barriers would reduce traffic noise levels to 60 to 68 DNL at receivers adjacent to Pittsburg Avenue and Richmond Parkway. Although exterior noise levels at some outdoor use areas near Richmond Parkway would exceed "normally acceptable" levels, the project includes a playground and neighborhood park in the center of the site as an alternative outdoor use area in an acceptable noise environment. Noise levels at the proposed park would be less than 60 DNL. Interior noise ieveis within proposed residential units are required to be maintained at or below 45 DNL. In residential units of standard construction, interior noise levels are approximately 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels with the windows partially open. Where exterior noise. levels exceed 60 DNL, compliance with State Building Code requires a report to be submitted with the building plans identifying the noise attenuation features included in the project's design to maintain interior noise levels at or below 45 DNL. Typically, 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 DNL. Where noise levels exceed 65 DNL, forced-air mechanical ventilation systems and sound-rated construction methods are normally required. Charles M. Salter Associates, Inc., made preliminary calculations of window and door assembly STC ratings required to meet 45 DNL. These calculations indicate that STC ratings of 29 to 37 would be required in residential units adjoining Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue. Feasible construction techniques such as these would adequately reduce interior noise levels to 45 DNL or lower. The following mitigations will reduce impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measure XI.a.: The following mitigation measures shall be included in the project to reduce the impact to a iess-than-significant level: Pace 44 L:\Nove\Initial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration\10/18/2006 - I . Design and construct noise barriers to achieve acceptable noise exposures where reasonable and feasible (60 DNL or less at Sinop-family residential land uses and 65 DNL or less at multiple-family residential uses). The final detailed design of the heights and limits of proposed noise barriers shall be completed at the time that the final grad ing plan is submitted. 2. The California Building Code and Contra Costa County require project- specific acoustical analyses to achieve interior noise levels of 45 DNL or lower in residential units exposed to exterior noise levels greater than 60 DNL. Building sound insulation requirements would need to include the provision of forced-air mechanical ventilation in noise environments exceeding 60 DNL, so that windows could be kept closed at the occupant's discretion to control noise. Special building construction techniques (e.g., sound-rated windows and building facade treatments) may be required where exterior noise levels exceed 65 DNL. These treatments include, but are not limited to, sound rated windows and doors, sound rated exterior wall assemblies, acoustical caulking, etc. The specific determination of what treatments are necessary will be conducted on a unit-by-unit basis during project design. Results of the analysis; including the description of the necessary noise control treatments', will be, submitted along with the building plans and approved prior to issuance of a. building permit. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the final development plans the Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall ensure that the (1) mitigations have been identified in the project specific acoustical analysis and that (2) these mitigations are included in the project plans. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. imaact Xl,b.: Ground Borne Noise/Vibration. No impact, The pro iect is not located within the immediate vicinity of any known producers of groundborne vibration (e.g., an active railroad line). Vibration levels associated with the construction of the project are not expected to result in levels high enough to be perceptible at adjacent residences to the south of Wildcat Creek, resulting in no impacts. Mitigation Measure Xl.b.: None Required. imaact Xl.c.: Ambient Noise. Less Than Significant impact. The noise environmental noise sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the project site results primarily from traffic along Richmond Parkway and localized industrial sources. Noise sources associated with the operation of the project would primarily include vehicular traffic accessing the site. Traffic noise generated by the proiect is not projected to increase noise levels by more than 1dB above the existing noise environment.' The s Nove Property Traffic Assessment, Dowling Associates, inc., January 2005. Page 45 LANove\Initial 5tudv L Mitioated NeG21ive Dedaraiion` 10/18/2006 V proiect does not propose changes in traffic that are substantial enough to provide a noticeable increase the noise environment at the nearby residential receivers inoise level increases of less than I dB are not noticeable to human hearing): a ies z than significant impact. Mitigation Measure Xl.c.: None Required. impact XI.d.: Temporary Noise. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The construction of the Proposed Pro iect would generate noise levels that would at 'times exceed ambient noise levels at noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the. project site. Construction activities would include demolition of existing structures, grading and excavation of areas on the site, and construction of new residential structures. Noise impacts from these activities depend on noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and length of noise generating activities, and the distance between the noise generating construction activities and receptors that would be affected by the noise. The highest noise levels would be generated durin g grading of the site, with lower noise levels occurring during building construction.' La rge pieces of earth-moving equipment, such as graders, scrapers, and bulldozers, generate maximum noise levels of 80 to 85 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. Typical houi rly average construction-generated noise levels are about 75 to 80 dBA measured at a distance of 100 feet from the site during busy construction periods. These noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of distance between the noise source and receptor. Intervening structures or terrain result in lower noise levels. The closest existing noise sensitive land is the residential area located south of the site across Wildcat Creek. These residences are located approximately 200 feet from the southernmost portion of the project site. Construction noise levels at adjacent residences would range from 69 to 74 dBA Leq when activities are occurring at the project's southernmost boundary. As construction activities precede away from these receivers, noise levels would be lower as a result of increased distance between the noise source and receivers and shielding provided by the new residential units. Construction noise levels would exceed 60 dBA Leq and existing ambient levels by more than 5 dBA when construction occurs on the site near the existing residences to the south. At times, noise levels produced by heavy equipment may interfere with normal residential activities. Typically, residential construction projects do not generate significant noise i mpacts when standard construction noise control measures are enforced at the project site and when the duration of noise at a particular receiver or group of receivers is lirmited to one construction season (typically one year) or less. Construction noises associated with projects of this type are disturbances that are necessary, and reasonabi e regulation of the hours of construction, as well as regulation of the arrival and operation of heavy equipment and the delivery of construction materials is effective in reducing impacts to a level that is less than significant. Mitigation Measure Xl.d.: The foliowing.construction noise control measures are recommended to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period. These measures would miflcate the Impact to a less than siQrl ificant level: Page 46 LANove\iniba!Studv&Wigated Negative Deciaration 1 1DII812006 I . Construction Period Development Activity Restrictions - Contra ctor andior developer shall comply with the following construction noise, d ust, litter, and traffic control requirements: a. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:30 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and shall be prohibited on state and federal holidays on the calendar dates that these hofida},s 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/Presidents' Day (State and Federal) Lincoln's Birthday (State) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day (State and Federal) Veterans Day (State and Federal) Thanksgiving Day (State and Federal) Day after Thanksgiving (State) _ Christmas Day (State and Federal) For specific details on the actual day the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal Holidays htto://www.oDm.00v/fedholi2006.asr) California Holidays htto://www.edd.ca.00v/eddsthol.htm 2. Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. 3. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. 4. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. 5. Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors. 6. Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for. responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise .complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffier,.et;..) and institute reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. Paae 47 L:Wove\initial Study E Mitigated Negative Debaraiton 1 0/1 812006 Responsibility and Monitoring: The Contra Costa County %oning Administrator shall review and approve the development pians to ensure that the construction noise controls are in place. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. lmaact XLe. and f.: Airport Related Noise. No impact. The project is no t located within two miles of a public or private airport. Therefore, this is not a potenti al impact. Mitigation Measure XLe, and f.: None Required. Paae 48 LANovelinitia!Study F,Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 1 011 812006 �.° ' Sionificant Significant Mffiaation Sianificaril, No � XU POPULATION � � ! ' Would the project. a. Include ial populationX I growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Sources 1, b. Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Sources 1, 2, 3) cDisplace substantial numbers of X people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Sources 1, 2, 3) / Induced Population Growth. Noimpact. The Proposed Pro:eotwiU provide 370 new residential units and therefore a population of 999 new residents. . ` (based upon the January 1. 2006 Department ofFinance's Contra Costa City and County Population Estimates of 2.70 persons per household.) There is potential that , additional growth will be induced through the introduction of housing into an area that has a long history ofindustrial use. Hovvavar, the adjacent uses are long established � waste and waste product handlers, not likely to relocate in the near future. While the potential for growth inducement 8xiats, this is not considered an adverse impact under ' CEC)A unless the project meets certain potential criteria. Potential criteria which can induce growth /perCE(]A` are: ^ Removal of obstacles to growth,- vVh\Ch include the expansion of infrastructure capacity. ^ the extension of urban services topreviously unserved areas. The Proposed Project will not result inthe extension of public services and utilities as this area is presently served. Thepub|icservices .and utilities have been planned around the anticipated grovvh associated with commercial development as planned for in the County's General Plan. , Although the Proposed Project vviU generate additional housing, the Proposed Project does not meet the above criteria for growth inducement, and therefore no impact, is expected. ' Page4A L:\wo"e\|mua|smo'&mougaemNepao"e[mciarauon ,10/1812006 Mitigation Measure XII.a.: None Required. imoact Xll.b. and c.: Displacement of Housing or Population, No impar f. The Proposed Project will not displace any housing or any population as it will OD nveri industrial uses to residential uses, a beneficial impact. Mitigation Measure Xll.b. and c.: None Required, Page 50 LANovellnitiai Study Mitigated Negative Deciaration',1011812000 Potentially Significant i Potentially Unless Less I na n , Significant Mitigation Significant ! No impact incorporated Impact ! imoact X111. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project: I a. Would the proiect result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically 1 altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental ± I facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental j impacts, in order to maintain ! acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives l for any of the public services? 1. Fire Protection tection (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 X ! & 5a-c) l 2. Police Protection (Sources 1, 2, 3, I X 4 & 5a-c) I I ! 3. Schools (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) X I 4. Parks (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) ! X i I I , i 5. Other Public Facilities (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) Preface The subject parcels are presently served by fire protection services provided through the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD), and served by police protection provided through the Contra Costa County Sheriff Department. Both of these agencies will continue to provide these public services to the subject parcels. The Proposed Project will introduce a new population which would be expected to create new demand for parks and other public facilities. imaact Xlll.a.1.: Fire Protection, Less than Significant. The Vesting Tentative Map/Preliminary and Final Development Plan will be regulated by the Fire District's codes and regulations as well as county ordinances. The project would be required to meet the Fire District's standard requirements: 1. The developer shall provide an adequate and reliable water supply for fire protection with a minimum fire flow of 2,000 GPM. Required flow shall be delivered from not more than two hydrants flowing simultaneously while maintaining 20 pounds residual pressure in the main. (900.2) CFC Pao_e 51 '_:\Hove\initial Studv L,MiUaated Negative Declaration',10/18/2006 ?. The developer shall provide hvdants of the East Bay Municipal Utility District type. Hydrant locations will be determined by CCCFPD office upon submittal of three copies o; a tentative map or site plan. ( 903.4.2) CFC 3. Provide access roadways with all-weather driving surfaces of not less than 20 feet unobstructed width, and not less than 13 feet 6 ins hes of vertical clearance, to within 150 feet of travel distance to all portions of the exterior walls of every building. Access roads shall have a minimum outside turning radius of 45 feet, and must be capable of suppc) rting the imposed loads of fire apparatus (i.e. 37 tons). ,(902.2) CFC Notes: • Access roads of 20 feet unobstructed width shall have NC) PARKING — FIRE LANE signs posted or curbs painted red. • Roads 28 feet in width shall have NO PARKING — FIRE LANE signs posted, allowing for parking on one side only, or curb painted red on non-parking side. • Roads 36 feet in width allow for parking on both sides. 4. The proposed development shall provide a second means for Fire District emergency apparatus. (902.2.1 ) CFC, Appendix III-D, Section 2.1 , CFC 5. Dead end Fire District access roads in excess of 150 feet long shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of Fire District apparatus. (902.2.2.4) CFC 6. Proposed access gates for Fire District apparatus shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Electrically operated gates shall be equipped with a Knox Company key-operated switch. Manually operated gates shall be equipped with a non-casehardened lock or approved Fire District lock. Contact the Fire District for Knox Company order form. (902.2.4) CFC 7. The developer shall provide traffic signal pre-emption systems (Opficom) on any new traffic signals installed due to this development. (2 1351 ) CVC S. The developer shalt submit three (3) copies of site plan'(s) indicating fire apparatus access for review and approval. (901.2.2.1) CFC 9. Access roads and hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to construction. (8704.1 ) CFC 10. Approved address numbers shall be provided. Such numbers shall contrast with their background and be readily visible from the street. (901.4.4) CFC Page K LANove\initial Study& Mitioated Negative Deciaraiion 10/18/2006 11 . The developer shall provide roof coverings with a minimum of Class C rating. Untreated wood shake or shingles are not allowed. (I 5C) 3) T-24 Part 2, CCP. 112. Where open space is maintained for public or private use, the developer shall provide access into these areas from the public ways. These access ways shall be a minimum 16 feet width to accommodate fire department equipment. All open spaces, when left in their natural state, shall meet the Fire District's weed abatement standards. (Contra Costa County Ordinance 2002-32, Article 14, section 1401 .1) 13. No flammable or combustible liouid storaoe tanks shall be located on the construction site without obtaining approval and necessary permits from the Fire District. (105.8 f.3) CFC 14. The developer shall submit a computer-aided design (CAD) digital fife copy of the subject project to the Fire District upon final approval of the. site improvement plans or subdivision map. CAD file shall be saved in an AutoCAD® 2002 file format or DXF file format. Contact the Fire District office for current acceptable AutoCAD® version. (105.3) CFC 15. The proposed homes shall be protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system complying with NFPA 13D. Submit three (3) sets of plans to the Fire District office for review and approval prior to installation. Mitigation Measure XIII.a.1.: None Required. Impact XIII.a.2.: Police Protection. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is, and will continue, to receive its police protection from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department. The addition of 370 residential units will increase demand for services but is not expected to have a significant negative impact on their ability to provide services. Mitigation Measure XIII.a.2.: None Required. . imaact XIIl.a.3.: Schools. Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project's 370 units will generate approximately 272 school children. They will attend Verde Elementary, Helms Middle and Richmond High Schools. The generation by school is as follows: Verde Fiementary (K-5) 0.35 students/'household = 129 Helms Middle (6-8) 0.15 students/household = 56 Richmond High (9-12) 0.234 students/household = 87 Conversations with school district personnel indicate that schools will not be impacted by this development (Kilmartin, August, 2006). The District collects S3.86isquare foot Pane 53 L:Wove\initial Study L Mitioated Negative Geciaration\10/1812006 in school fees from residential development. Pavment of State mandated sc hool fees will mitioate potential impacts to schools. Mitigation Measure XIII.a.3.: The Project Sponsor shall pav the reau fired staiE- mandated school impact tees. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall require written verifi--ation from the School District that fees have been paid. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. Impact Xl1i.a.4.: Parks. Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation. i he Proposed Project will result in increases in the demand for parks and recreation services. The County's park standard is 3 acres/1000 residents. The County Park and Recreation Ordinance calls for a dedication of parkland of 350 square feet/d\Nelling unit or payment of an in lieu fee. The project proposes to provide on-site parks in the form of approximately: 0.3 acres of on-site lots, 0.5 acres of park in the center of the project, 1.2 acres of park along Wildcat Creek, 1.5 acres of landscaped area throughout the site, and 1.7 acres of wooded trails and grassy play areas. The project's two acres of developed park area is less than the County's req uirement to provide approximately 3 acres of park and recreation area per 1 ,000 residents, creating a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure XIII.a.4.: The project shall increase the developed park area or pay in-lieu fees. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. imoact XIII.a.5.: Other Public Facilities. No impact. Mitigation Measure XIII.a.5.: None Required. Page 54 L:1Nove\Initial Studv&Miticated Neeative Deciaraiion ,1 011 8120 06 Potentially Significant Potentially Uniess Less Than Significant Mitioation Significant No impact incorporated ' impact I impact X111. RECREATION — Would the project: I i a. Increase the use of existing I X neichborhood and regional parks or ! other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be j accelerated? (Sources 1, 2, 33, 4, i 5a-c & 22) b. include recreational facilities or `` X require the construction or I i expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse '} physical effect on the environment? Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 22 ! ` j lmnact XIV.a. and b.: Less Than Significant. As summarized by the Trails for Richmond Action Committee (TRAC) in their August 2005 letter, the Proposed Project is located immediately adjacent to the Wildcat Creek Regional Trail, which connects with the completed San Francisco Bay Trail on the west side of the Richmond Parkway. The East Bay Regional Park District plans to construct a new Bay Trail segment from the Wildcat Creek Regional Viewpoint along the west side of the West County Wastewater District Property to connect with San Pablo Creek and the Phase 1 West County Landfill Bay Trail to be completed this fall by Republic Services. All of these completed and planned trails are shown on the Richmond Bay Trail Map as adopted in ABAG's San Francisco Bay Trail Plan and in the December 17, 2002 Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The cumulative impacts of increased trail use by the residents of the Proposed Project combined with all developments underway or, proposed in the vicinity, will increase demand for trails. The Proiect, with its 999 residents, represent a small portion of trail users; however, it will be an attractive feature as noted by TRAC: ". . . Indeed, the proximity of the Wildcat Creel; Regional Trail (WCRT) and the Bay Trail will be major reasons why people would choose to reside in the proposed new residential development. Residents with their visiting friends and relatives, will need a completed trail link for walking, running and biking to the Bay Trail and planned connections with shoreline parks, including the Landfill and Point Pinoie Regional Shoreline." However, there are concerns that the Wildcat Creek Regional Trail route west, which is in the Contra Costa Countywide Bicvcle and Pedestrian Pian, is unusable during the winter and spring seasons due to flooding and siltation. Paae 55 LANoveMnitiaf 5tudv&Mitigated Negative Declaration',10!1612006 The Project Sponsors have indicated that they will work with the appropriate agencies to help remedy the existing conditions. As the project would generate less than 1.000 neve residents, the proi�ct will not have an impact on existing neighborhood or regional cart; faciiities that would result in substantial deterioration of those facilities. All of the project's recreational facilities have been evaluated for their effects on the environment (as part of the overall project) and will therefore not r esult in any impacts to the environment. Mitigation Measure XIV: None Required. Paoe 56 L:\Nave\lnitma Studv&Mitioated Negative Declaration 1011BI2006 Poientiahy Sionificant P oienti a I i v Unless Less Than Sian if i can*, Mitigation Sian if ica nIL No -Impact i incorporated impact Impact XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIN-1 Would the project: a. I Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial 1 X increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersection? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, ; j i , 5a-c, 16 & 241) b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county I X congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ` I j (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 16 & 241) c. I Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial I safety risks? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c & 16) d. Substantially increase hazards due i to a design feature (i.e., sharp curves or danoerous intersections) or incompatible uses (i.e., farm equipment)? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a- i c, 16 & .241) e, I Result in inadequate emergency i access? (Sources 1, 2, 13, 4, 5a-c 16 241) f. Result in inadequate parking X capacity? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 16 & 241)_ Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (i.e., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4, 5a-c, 16 & 241) Pacie 57 LANove\iniba!SLubv Wmated Necative De-ciaration 1 10/1812006 Preface A Traffic Assessment was prepared by Dowling Associates which was peer reviewed by George Nickelson in January 2006 and updated in Auoust 2007. impact XV.a.: Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would generate a total of 197 trips (41 in/156 out) during the AM peak commute hour and 24G trips (162 in/87 out) during the PM peal; commute hour. Based on current travel patterns and traffic distribution information from the West County Travel Demand Mod el, the project trips would be distributed as follows: • 15% on 1-580 west to/from the Richmond San Rafael Bridge; • 50% on 1-580 east to/from Berkeley/Oakland; • 10% on Richmond Parkway north to/from 1-80; • 10% on Richmond Parkway south to/from downtown Richmond/BART; • 5% on Parr Boulevard east to/from San Pablo; • 5% on Brookside Drive east to/from Richmond and San Pablo; and • 5% on Jrd Street south to/from Richmond and San Pablo. When added to the future baseline traffic volumes (existing volumes plus traffic generated by other already approved developments), the seven study intersections would all operate satisfactorily (Level of Service "D" or better) - summarized as follows: TABLE XV-1 BASELINE + PROJECT INTERSECTION OPERATIONS 1 i AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Study Intersection 1 Conditions I Conditions I LOS 1 V/C Ratio LOS t Vl Ratio 1 Richmond Parkway/ C 1 0.77 l B I 0.70 Parr Boulevard Richmond Parkway/ C I 0.80 D O.85 Pittsburg Avenue Richmond Parkway/ C 0.715C I 0.75 Gertrude Avenue 1 Garrard Avenue! I .A I 0.40 A ; 0.41 i Barrett Avenue Garrard Avenue/ A 0.47 A 0.39 MacDonald Avenue I I Garrard Avenue/ I_ A 1 0.47 i A. 0.411 Canal Street i Castro Street/ j A 0.44 B i 0.67 j i-580 Westbound Ramos i Although the project would add slightly to baseline congestion levels at the study intersections, the intersections' operation would remain satisfactory and the project impacts would be considered "less than significant." Page 56 LANove\initial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration 10/18/2006 The project would have two full access intersections:on Pittsburg Avenue. Because the two access points would connect internally via a loop street, the project's emergency access would be satisfactory. The proiect's westerly access would be located on Pittsburg Avenue about 300 feet east of Richmond Parkway. Based on year 2020 cumulative traffic projections, this distance would be adequate to allow for an adequately designed westbound left turn lane on the Pittsburg Avenue approach to Richmond Parkway. The project access would not be expected to conflict with intersection flows at the Richmond Parkway/Pittsburg Avenue intersection. Mitigation Measure XV.a.: None Required. impact XV.b.: Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Cumulative (year 2020) traffic projections have been obtained from the West County Travel Demand Model, This model includes new trip generation from all approved development as well as development allowed under the County and cities' general plans. No new development was assumed for the Nove Property in the West County Travel Demand Model. Thus, the project trips were added to the model traffic projections. With the 2020 projections at the study intersections (with additional trips generated by the project), the intersections' operations were recalculated. As outlined in the table below, all of the study intersections would operate satisfactorily (LOS "D" or better) with the exception of the Richmond Parkway/Pittsburg Avenue intersection. TABLE XV-2 CUMULATIVE YEAR 2020 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Flour Study Intersection Conditions I Conditions LOS V/C Ratio LOS V/C Ratio Richmond Parkway/ C j 0.79 I C I 0.71 Parr Boulevard I Richmond Parkway/ F 1.10 F 1 .13 f Pittsburo Avenue I I Richmond Parkway/ I D 0.81 D I 0.88 1 Gertrude Avenue I ` Garrard Avenue/ C 0.73 A 0.52 Barrett Avenue Garrard Avenue/ A 0.51 I A 0.47 MacDonald Avenue Garrard Avenue/ i A 0.52 ` A 0.49 ` Canal Street Castro Street/ j A i 0.45 D I 0.81 1-580 Westbound Ramos 1 At the Richmond Parkway/Pittsburg Avenue intersection, the cumulative year_2020 conditions would be LOS "r" during both the AM and PM peak commute hours. It is noted that the intersection conditions would be somewhat better if calculated using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 operations method. The HCM method provides Pape 59 L Nove\initial 5tudv&Mitigated Negative Deciaration\1011812006 a more detailed anaiysis with traffic signal timing and phasing incorporated i nto the czdculation. in 2020, the Richmond Parkwav/Pittsburg Avenue Intersection would operates at an unacceptable LOS 7" during both the AM and PM peak hours. The Nove Property project trips would account for 4.2°� of the AM peal: hour cumulative volume- s and 4.8% of the PM peak hour cumulative volumes. This would be considered a signit'=icant cumulative impact. Mitigation Measure XV.b.: The 2020 cumulative conditions at the Richmond Parkway/Pittsburg Avenue intersection shall be mitigated through widen ing/restriping of either the Richmond Parkway or Pittsburg Avenue approaches to the intersection. OR Alternatively, on Richmond Parkway a third through lane on both the northbound and southbound approaches of the Richmond Parkway shall be added (with the widening made for a distance of 500 feet to the north and south of the existing stop bars on Richmond Parkway). On Pittsburg Avenue a separate left, through/right turn lane on the westbound and eastboun d approaches (of Pittsburg Avenue at Richmond Parkway) shall be developed. The project shall contribute a fair share toward identified mitigation measures proposed for this intersection. Such contribution could (subject to County review) include a contribution toward the local Traffic impact Fees. With implementation of either of these mitigations, the intersection's 2020 operation would be an acceptable LOS "D". Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the Final Devi lopment Plans, the Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall ensure th at appropriate impact fees have been paid. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. imoact XV.c. and d.: No Impact. The project will have no effect on air traffic or on any existing design features (i.e., curves, intersection), or other use as no new public roads will be constructed, resulting in no impacts. Mitigation Measure XV.c. and d.: None Required. IrADact XV.e.: No Impact. The project will have multiple ingresses and egresses that will provide emergency access, resulting in no impacts. Mitigation Measure XV.e.: None Required. Page 60 LANovelinitial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration l 10/18/2006 V impact XV.f.: No impact. The project would provide 740 off-street parking spaces or two spaces for each dwelling unit. A total of 21 3 on-street (all on site) park i ng spaces are shown on the current drawinos. The County Code requires two off-street spaces per dwelling unit (for the si Hale family and 2 bedroom multi-family units proposed in the project), and the project supply would meet that requirement. The County Code also requires 65 visitor parking spaces (0.25 spacesimulti-family unit 6) - the project's 213 on-site spaces would equal the county's requirement. As long as the project's final plan meets or exceeds county code, there is no impact identified. Mitigation Measure XV.f.: None Required. Impact XV.g.: No impact. AC Transit operates bus service in the Richmond Area. The closest bus stop is at Third and Market Streets, a little over one-quarter mile from the site and accessible via the Wildcat Trail system. WestCat provides service to BART. Trails along Wildcat Creek will connect the site with the bus stops on Third Street. Given the available capacity, this project would have a beneficial impact on bus service as it would increase ridership. Mitigation Measure XV.g.: None Required. v All multi-famiiv units are two bedroom. Faae 61 LANoveUnitia!Study&Mitioated Negative Declaration\10116/2006 c Potentially significant i Potentially I Unless Less Tha in significant j Mitigation i Sianificarit No i imoact 1 incorporated I impact I impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS I i Would the project: a. a. I Exceed wastewater treatment i X requirements of the applicable [Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) b. Require or result in the construction X of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c c. Require or result in the construction X of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) d. Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlement and resources, or are new or expanded entitlement deeded? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) e. Result in determination by the I X 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? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & I 5a-c) I f. 1 Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the.project's solid waste disposal + (j needs? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5a-c) ~ g. Comply with federal, state and local I I i Y. statues and regulations related to solid waste? (Sources 1, 2, 3, 4 & j 5a-c) I I I I imoact XVI.a.. b. & e.: Wastewater. Less Than Significant. The subject parcels are within the service area of West County Wastewater District (WCWD), which has a 30" -sanitary sewer line in Pittsburg Avenue and there is a 36" to 54" trunk fine in Garden Tract Road, which conveys sewage to the wastewater treatment plant. The project will require annexation to the District. The WCWD provides primary sedimentation, Paae 62 L:ANoveVnitial Study&Mitigated Negative Deciaration\1011812006 roughing filter, activated sludge, secondary clarification, disinfection and an aerobic sludoe dioestion. Anaerobicaliy digested sludoe is dried in lagoons via evaporation and remaining biosolids are removed and buried in adjacent landfill. Up to b million g allons per day is provided to East Bay Municioal Utility District for its North Richmond Water Reclamation Facility. Remaining effluent is dechlorinated and disposed of via a deep-water outfall in the San Francisco Bay. The plant's average dry weather flow is 7.8 million gallons per day. The plant design capacity is 12.5 million gallons per day. The project will add to the incremental demand, but is not expected to have a significant impact on the facility. Mitigation Measure XVI.a., b, and e.: None Required. Impact-XVI.c.: Storm Drainage. Less Than Significant. The subject parcels are within the downstream portion of County Drainage Area 19A, and there is a 54" storm drain in Pittsburg Avenue that discharges Drainage Area 19A and the study area into open earth ditch west of Garden Tract Road, and eventually discharges into San Pablo Bay. The southern portion of the site drains to Wildcat Creek. Development of the subject parcels would increase the amount of impervious surface area,-and would potentially increase runoff volume from the subject parcels . This impact is mitigated by Mitigation Measure Vlli.a. - f. and through payment of drainage arca fees. Mitigation Measure XVI.c.: No additional mitigation is required. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. Imaact XVI.d.: Water. Less Than Significant with Mitigation: For water, service, the subject parcels are within the service area of 'East Bay Municipal Utility District, which has 8" water line in Pittsburg Avenue. The study area is in the central pressure zone (0 to 100 ft.), but is located towards the bottom of the pressure zone. Preiirninary indications from EBMUD are that the existing 8" water line may need to be upgraded subject to specific proposal for development, a potentially significant impact unless mitigated. Mitigation Measure XVI.d.: The Project Sponsors shall secure a "will serve" letter from EBMUD that addresses the ability to serve the site with adequate .supply and pressure. If the water line requires upgrading then the project shall provide its fair share contribution toward .the costs of that upgrade. Responsibility and Monitoring: Prior to approval of the Final Development Plans, the Contra Costa County Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the "will serve" letter. Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant. Paoe o3 L:\Nove\initial Studv&Mitioated Negative Declaration\1011812006 lmuact XVI.f. and a.: Solid Waste. Less Than Significant. Development of the subject parcels would likely generate solid waste, but there is evidence to suaoest that there is sufficient landfill capacity in the North Richmond area to handle such solid waste. This is a less than significant imaact. Mitiaation Measure XVi.f. and a.: None Required. Facie 64 L:\Nove\initia!Study Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 10/18/2006 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant i Mitigation I Significant No impact incorporated impact impact i XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF I I SIGNIFANCF — Would the project: a. Does the project have the potential X to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish and wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? �%b. Does the project have impacts that X are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerably means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the I effects of past projects, the effects of other current p rrent projects, and the effects of probably future roiects?) j c. Does the project have environmental I ); effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, I I I either directly or indirectly? I All impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, neology and soils, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, recreation, traffic and transportation, and utilities and service systems can be reduced to less than significant levels with the mitigation measures identified in this document. Faae 65 L:\NoveUnitial Study&Mitigated Negative Declaration\1011812006 I I �_I 7 cl VII� I ' t I PatrAtvd I � r flrndsstd. M �►� ` -_ Pro►Qe. \ : Qrl,r mWc PRfl4�i.'f m STfE In E L Z v � h � Q Gertrude Aw N � rb 3 e,►lett tine 4I t— r.Macdondid Mrq_..__ —• _ l 24 Mot to b mtp 1N',Curd"r atm Source: Gowiino Associates, inc. Finure 1: Vicinity Map �..,. W�'iBFJI:.I=i.v -'`--��-M&"�.'�=�+�''I�.L6'••'••?�1-'^t:��-••"N:�:l Ci;6l.^•G '�N.�wr•%•.eb.eniw'Y:•I e.A + •�m►•wr :�w..1�Ttll{�y "ou1...er�.•nie� eul.a..Ma''IaW. �..�'•lauw:. .J�O i i i •�+i�f �iw� ik}:�,.i,ti��i p h7,' : "I'-' ae yyM� is . (^•�� ��� 1 �" 1 y , �'�3t��'�` • i} `Y"i Cs �11 'j�j� n�i}r �I : 'i.= r' 1!� is �u�.. i •.�*, Q ,,,,,,,,.,.. C 4ti�Jik,�JYl& + t7wwN '� ;. 1 tr n ue inion ° NOW A tY, ul.- � iN,, • u ° �;` •��•iJaP.d�__ Mwj Ism F�i .•5��;}�) f YIi .'��� __.� ./ tt �1�.. o!� '��ui r=1 i •r 4v ago 1 n..r} ° e}ll'r�fie] t ,� 'f ;Oi! r"�� q�* O wwr+ o- .._. �..� �� till ya • �.�I�l Y •>rT.l�/M �1Y� Y t �i"� s �•9-ry lir /~I a ".,• ,,,moi, /. }� `{i' t4�1: {��:... I, 1 •:it y. �• � .'A.,,�u"'o".o i�tu u'__iir.afsP Oa6 �� G O �/��� ���,� {E�O ii�)'� s rY,'1"'�'N � '14l 1 k. �.M 1 1 �3 3 T• ••�,1•t�.'�':!�►"`0'�}�'�y�lo a ;�_'�' �:�` :,� �4A•s;��jla.'.Wi rl �d" ••� v. /&Crs A�a.�.ao7 4r 'e.. p y •I r -� 19j ' ys IY •�.p:zA�a—Mi►a#4..�r'M s,fir 51'KL� !s J:�' ,�W. 1(� �a�I�[r*; 8 p'vn• ..!� O 11 1 7 �� : >r . .�•1� .`c ,( � F't'I�t'P � 7 L'�"�p� s 1 •�r, 'l �._ I! :YSCbd:J1±.; 3i6lih. ",1� n. I •,i -+f.:"� Y...._... .ois .:r.. !a,_.. dk v a p'•�� ��,It'��� u�i''"� 7lYfi�'11i a �,,;;` •: `iii � '����� ��� ��Cy. •@�01f4iralfO'i/Jr : tahY"'t � O p •.," i IY�1l i �,f"ul'�I) , 1Y u •. •►f�'-�,�r:;; may+- • i y, 4Ar ^'kiir C � • v' �'"�"' '.. v ,{ � r'`�' �'T' .''q� -; � - Z �'z�:Xa�Y�� y r •. y v.-`r:. ` t r � .d�r� } Y.�•yJ�y y� -.fie^--�+� �r .1- %�- G` -q(F � .�. F«' C'uie,''•;t4S� x - k-^ s _ s� t t � r •i — z.^ r.•. iw..r.e. 2. � r'- �..;. .v v..t� d;�-,^ �`T' s�� j -s��7+� �raY '' �' max• � :�`; t<A; �c � .� } tt *� t, 4 ;,� � �, .o S a r� C."�uJ.r�is, �� „� i: ,r r , z y.:q }' ''• s -�'-yr+'"J. k `.•��;�'tW�i((+�Tl ra NA" FIT y���t+� S`�°'r ak'ras. �z" •� �"s.".^ •+�, • � a �.'q -s t � re l jLTfv'°"y" ,s +7 5'. •�+ �4Q'` + '»:mei` t9 w 491 D• �'S �y.•:+c, 1N1 (�rrt�[s'„•• F ,i.. 1 3:} '; }�J',7•a�ry{' ';tls�.i x+r"i.•c. ,: s;' tr v. , '4?._ ,,y tK•�Y't �. Y�!c�I�w�1i n u� a-E.<.,.�! '� �*.'G. rs jj.rr � rza� a •..i't6.x`'14 � :''� '...ty � t �yJy'° v 7, (*• :4 . 1-2WN.^ " !`F r�.a YI�� ; a.�tH 'f `' •.Az�t? ^!s yr . rjY. jt 4:t t �F c,.- r- fMG Cw� W { ��—t'"'s`' - t J L * _ t _ • r l�r' yy l b` p - .oa• �� M t,xr n �tL..a7 fir- '^p•�+s� �R" ''.� � 'c v �*^ g ,t. t C '}� r i { t i•1 t .J.yr lyr 7te ve".�,i y. �• r,Pb�tf �1.��;"'..G R sl6ig �fi'�y� e�'�`t' t't4 ` S. By 'tLLr=="`°'eFit.il.a 1 t� E 2 I� Y Q� ti •4 "t`{ x+� �!'F+-1�?�av�',�t,6,S'r�;l�+ - �''*" ..,,�? x[�g� ''�'� ems' ._� t �[t � L�{:.� LIE, 't �t '4� � v4 .� �-.t.� t ��. ,'.��-f—'- _ .sem..�_ �-:�--�it f ,�•:*` �S Mn� _"`."-.Y'St T..A: a� � Y'�'-,-_�}�Lf�} l,..y `y�/�L. �•. V• � ��: ���_Y'"'' 4 J r.monra,Fam Chevron ReOnery Wlnd Rose 2003 w'.;,•cti 14% `s101 VIM cc"AW1 1414.1E AIIN 0.Duller 040412004 Bay Area Ah Quality Management DbWd _ r _J Wlnd Speed Knots Chevron Refinery Rlet nand,CA �� + nvr,rnnrssPcf;• rum N•Jns UTMs-554$314200.659 Dates,0110.1105-MUM 1.26 Knots 1.34% to meter tower a d t�Fmr.;irrn R'M•fi:va=se Dfrectlon 2005 .'. (plaering From) Jan 1•Dec ST. MIdMgM - 1.1 PM Y. _41 4'U ri[*msa:Ju.'cA a+,+.rr IIMvry w4G:tn •.•---V--�--•— Figure 4 Chevron Refinery Wind Rose APPENDIX A PROJECT DESCRIPTION DP053024 AND SD058938 Signature Properties is requesting a General Plan Amendment, Development Plara approval and Vesting Tentative map for approximately 29.2 acres bounded by Richmond Parkway to the Vilest, Pittsburg Avenue to the North; Wildcat Creek to the South, and Central Street to the East. The surrounding uses consist of residential to the south and light industrial to the East, and North and agricultural to the IVest. Current uses of the propern,, are as seasonal growing fields for propagation and growing of annual color. The property is part of an underutilized area bounded by San Pablo Creek to the North, the Southern Pacific RR line to the East, Wildcat Creek to the South and Richmond Parkway to the West. This area is part of the North Richmond redevelopment project whicb was formed in 1987. The area was historically used for truck farming and rose growing before competition forced the closure of these operations. Currently about sixty percent of this land is used for seasonal growing of potted plants and the balance is used for an elementary school, ball field, recycling businesses, landscaping companies and a small portion of light industrial. The current General Plan designates this area as heavy and light industrial, however only limited progress has been made in attracting industry to this area over the past 18 years. Given the proximity of the existing elementary schoo 1, baseball fields and existing residential, this property would more logical]),be developed as residential for the following reasons. Because of the property's proximity to regional transit corridors as well as mass transit; we believe this is an ideal location for a residential land use. The Richmond BART station, Amtrak Capitol Corridor and Golden Gate Transit are approximately 2 miles from the site and AC transit is within walking distance. Major job centers such as San Francisco (20 Miles); Oakland (16), and Concord (24) are within easy commute of the. site. Richmond Parkway. Interstate 80 and Interstate 580 are within short driving distances of the site. Wildcat Creel: and the Richmond Parkway Bay Trail offer recreational opportunities that cannot be fully appreciated next to heavy industrial uses. A residential community will encourage the use and increase the awareness of the trail making for a more pleasant experience for trail users and residents alike. The residential area to the south of the property is currently underserved by retail and other services. An expanded residential communin., will add critical mass to attract retailers and other services to the area. The site is an excellent example of urban infill on underutilized land. Given the proximity to mass transit,job centers and the current blighted condition of the prupertml; this is an excellent opportunity to create housing withoutadvancing the urban boundaries further from the job centers and cultural resources currently available in the Bay Area. Because of the housing shortage in the Bay Area, there is tremendous pressure for development in outlaying areas forcing people to drive further and eliminating.prime. agricultural land. Because of this, Signature has proposed a General Plan land use designation change from Heavy Industry and Light Industrial designations to a residential designation. Not 0111), would this designation change increase the Count=tax base; but more imponantly, it would generate revenue for the Redevelopment Agency which could be used to fund other improvement projects in the North Richmond Community. Current assessed value of the property is $4,500,000 based on current use. After approval and build out, the assessed value.will be in the neighborhood of$160,000,000, generating approximately $800,000 per year in additional revenue to the Redevelopment agency. The proposed project consists of 370 homes divided into three housing types: Townhomes, Cluster Homes, and Condominiums. There will be 120 two story townhouses ranging in square footage from 1,351 square feet to 1.667 square feet and from two to three bedrooms. They will include enclosed two car garages and front court vards. Each unit faces onto a landscaped courtyard or public street. The Cluster Homes will consist of 110 three to five bedroom two story detached homes with two car garages and private yards. They will be arrayed either on private courts or on public streets overlooking open space. These homes will range from 1,361 square feet to 2,468 square feet. There are 140 condominiums consisting of flats and Townhomes in ten buildings of fourteen homes each. The units will include two and three bedrooms and range in size from 961 square feet to 1,487 square feet. Twenty of the homes will be one story with direct garage access. All units will have two car garages and patios or balconies. Guest parking will be provided throughout the development at a ratio of.5 spaces per unit. The project currently has 740 enclosed parking spaces, as well as 213 on-street parking spaces. Of the 370 homes, 56 will be below market rate, available for moderate and very low income buyers. Proposed landscape improvements to the site consist of a 1.7/ acre park located at the entTance to the development which includes a play area and passive recreational facilities. There will also,be 1.2 acres of part: adjacent to the Wildcat Creek trail to provide resting areas and trail access for the community. Interspersed throughout the community will be tot lots and reflection areas. including a .5 acre Paseo in the middle, to enhance the community experience. Total open space in the community will be 6.7 acres. The property will have two access points onto Pittsburg Avenue with landscape buffers and a sound wall to provide a sense of separation between the residential portion and the commercial development. In addition. a median is proposed for Pittsburg Avenue.to enhance the visual separation. E A � DF: C A! I - R N I . , y'. i-TQ e r,Di '13Ani= 2IlC l:e_,2C L - lie �uF Gi1i. rnol;5eham^sneer.. S��r Gvaisi. uovemc urr_c:o: Novemilel 27 200., kost Mara:Picts, i v Contra CostL, Cour, 651 Pine Street 2nd Fioor, North Wind Maruncc.CA W553 Sudiezt: Nove Residential Development SCIDt: 20061 02100 Lear kose Marie Picrras: Tht Stats Ciearinghousc submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Drciaration to sei acted state agencies for review. On the enclosed Dccument Details keport niease note that the Cicatiagilousc nas listed the state agencies that reviewed your document. The review period ciosed on 1Noverzzber 22,2006, and the comments from the responding agency i;its) is(are)enclosed. Ii this comment nacknac is not in order,picric nonny the State Clearinghouse iti>rriediatriy. Pleas--refer to the project's mr,611zit Stat'.. Cicartnaitousc number in future correspondence so that we may respond nromntiv. Picas= note tiia.Section 21 104(c) of the California Pubii::Rnsourccs Cod_ states tha:. "A.responsibie or other nubiic agency shall only make substannve co=,.::nts regarding those activities invoived in a protect which arc witi ui an arca of expertise of the agerz--v 07 which ac- required u,be earned out or approved D}'=aeencl;. Those comments shall be supnoned b: snccific documcntajion." Tires: comment:; ar,_� forwarded for use in preparing your i-inai environmental documcn:. S nouid you need mor.. information a. ciarification o; tit, enclosed cornmcntl kvc rccotnrricnd tha you coma C ti:7 commcntutt` accnc•r directi r. This ictte acimowicdccs that You hay::comoiied vrith the Stats Cicarinehousc rcvic-rcau ireracnu for drat: mvironm--mai down:=. pursuant ir,the Caiifomia Environmental Duaiirr Ac:. Picas,conraci th::Star; Cicarm Tho= at (916.1 445-UG i3 i:"VOL iiavc.an1:'ouestiom rcearding tl= environmcntai orn,=- Stncerel}, i crr,'I:obcn_ Director. `,rats C,_aringhouc_ �r.ciosurc. Cc P.es011rets AccncY 1400 iLldT`:ETREi:, P.0.BO-'. 3o4-t S,._-R_ MN..TG, 95EK";a4 TLu ti)1L�•'r4i`-GiJ a,. T'-...(9I.L,ur..-uU�♦ �:t`��`:.0:-.CL'.^ti.. uu..urlt=IIL :.P=Latta r._uu L State Clearinothouse Gaza L2i SC"ff' 2006102106 Proiec, TiOe Re31dsnt;al L'�l�•DDmErr Leab Aoen:, _u,,, ;osts Courn: 1 VCE' MMi heated, Neaaiive L' taiai:iL- Descriotion D Ar.amendment to the Land Use clement c` C `the ontra :.pszs Z;c)unv.' venerdi Pian -D� •-2V •, reoesionating two parcels totaimp 29.2 acres,from Heau:and 'coni mdustm,to MUlii-=arnily Residential- Medium Density and approval of a Vesting Tentative Mac.. The two pa-cels fr,�id 408-180+-010 and 40B-17D-072)are being proposed forme aeveiopmen, of a residential subcilwsicr, with 370 residenilai units: 120- 2-stop!townhomes, 110- 2-story muster homes, ane 14,; condominiums tooth 1 and 2 stones). Qt these,57 units would be aftorcabie unit;,. Ali oarkirZD would be onsite. A total of 0.7 acres of open spaceipark area is pr000set. The proiec,also incivai—_s an annexation into the West 0ouniv Wasievrater District. Lead Agency Contact Name Rose Marie Pietras Agency Contra Costa County Phone (925)32cr 1216 Fax emall Address 551 Pine Street 2nd Fioor, North Wino City Martinez State 3A Zip P,5-5s 1 Project Location i Count)' Contra Costa City Richmond Region � Cr:,ss Streets cast side of the Richmond Parkway between Pittsburo Avenue and Wildcat ,.reel-. Parcel Nc. 40b-18D-010 and 408-i7D-07 Township Range Section Base Proximity to: Hiphways Airnorts Rahways Wa terwa vs Schools Land Use Near.•industnal and Light industry, Pianned Unit Distriz-t(P-1) i Project issues Aesthefic/Visual,Air;rualit : Arcnaeoiooic-Histor;z,- Dramaae/Absorption: Geoiooic'Seism;-:Noise; ='ubii;Services: Recrsaiion/Paris: Schools/Universiiie-: Soi!erosion/�omaa�ii�n?•�radinp. ioxiciHuzaroous, irafficl_-IMUlatior:'. Vvater Gualiv, Reviewinp Resuumes Aoen7,,;:= -_atonal Vv eter :,tuati y Contro!Eoard. Region,_. Dcoanmen,Di Parrs znt; Apencies Recr6aiioc: 1•4anve.Amerman heritage Commission. Depanment o' Heattr, Services: Deoanmem c =isr,and•Same, P.egion 3: Decarimenl of Wates Resourcez::ahiomia iionway Pairo!: ':aluan_, Distnc'. -.: Depanment of Taxi.SUpstarces Control Date received 102''_00Smarr c.review 1UI24;20r5 -end o,`Review 1 1,122200 i i i IVDi P-IanL'b ir. ma,c t!elcs resul:trout insufr;misn'. iniormaiia:; Drovi,eL' D)'i=-aC a^_5"1_`• D7 rULIF 0 RM 71 Gov DEF'Ar,,rrL'N NT OF TF-42,,-, 11T,!.—r-D CY 1, 11.1 GRAND �kVENTtT B 0 2 E,y 6 n P H"'-)NTE (3'111', 2 S 5 c c:, =:^tr.::. I '51Ci 2 6--5 TTS 1 SO 0)7 2221: N' 2.1 2006 SCE200C)10')100 Rost Manc Fictras Community Development Department Contra Costa County 651 Pint Street, Noah 'W'in . 2' 'F;mm T� Mlaru'ncz, CA 9A D,--a-r-ML. Flicirias: Novo Residential Deveiopment - Nlifioated Nvuafivt Decia-ation (MND. Than'l-, N.-nu for Inciuding the ,--aiIfc7TiIa Department ofTransportationMcparimcTit'i in tir-11: ,znvIrc)Tjmcmaj T--vICN;' DTO=Efor MIS DMIP-C-1 We have reviewed the intent to A6ops L4' fa; this tend offer t*nt! ioliowmL, COMMCM.7— Trafj-ic Impact ArwiY.-IS V;� v,muid ilke to rnv1--w Do%vhm: A Sso fate, 2006 Tmffi: Asst!ssmcnit fc)- thc Novc k=sIccTilla,: Dawclo=cm TIT-oi=,L. The c.mstim-, condmowS aria jysis '< w. imi a- the --rimptiatc trT and mv) 61scTinuum t laol. fOT-v"arc" Co the T.-affi--* incluci!TiL --To —Icchnk::2!! this. 'DI-01tCl. Picas:: send Two conics to the address at tht. ton 0:1 this. 'tUMIP.f2C!. %-n o- y My RM O Mum Pur,:: NumaN i 2 f,201 F. (S j h: _Ci.—5 NO is you havo an cw=6 onz. TIM C11HL ,Sj B Dis,tric'-,B721111ch I R C EQ A Stats. Cicaringnousc, a; rr m. L,7r(I L.,C 7 rnoij I II• a f7rc7Nm-Laif tdt:' U; _dlliUl IIW - n, fi !L,'_" __. .. ---- -- --- -- DcF'e�f:l nttQ: '/www.CITC�'. 111" POST l;^til,=.6047 _— YOUIJTV!!L=.OALi-GRiJI- P!5� i 07'I y.a 550! Novemne, 1 . LOO:, Ills. Pose Maria Metra- Contra Costa Counn" E.51 Pini: Street, North Win-, tido- IViartinez. C.-' E. Dear Ms. etI ate. I SLID!nct: N:)ve Residential Deveiopmer:, 200610210 •, North Richmond, Contra Costa Count- The Department of Fish and Game (DrG) has reviewed the document for the subject prD)e:-- Pisase be advised this project ma\' result in cnanctes to fish and wildiiTe resources as de�cribecl in the California Code of Reaulations, Title 14, Section 75°.old) 1)(A -(u) Thereiore, a de minimis determination is not appropriate, and an environmental filing fee as required cinder =ish and Game Code Section '11.4(d) should be paid to the Contra CGsta County Clerk c)rl o- before fiiing of the Notice of Determination for this project. =or any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow, or change the bed, channel, or bani !which may include associated riparian resources) Of a river or strearrl, or use material irc�m 2 streambed, DF.:; may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA;, pursuant tc Section 1000 et sec of the Fish and Game Code. with the applicant. issuance of SAAB is sub!ez:L to the _ -@Iiiorni2 Environmental :)ualav Act (C;:�04%% DFC", as a responsibie agency unser wit' consider the CE:OA document for the Drolec'. T ne CEDA document should ti-ilk, identiiv t he potential Impacts to the stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avolaance, mitigation, monitoring and reporting commitments to7 Complei!on of the apreemen! To D✓lair. InrOrmanor,about the SAS, nOtlTlcauorl DroceEE, D!=-2Se az7-es Our website a': wwV,'.dfc.c2.doV'1 60;✓'; Or tU reoUest a notification D2ci:aaa. contact tnE, SireamDed .-'�Ita a tier Program at 1*707 1 P44-5;,2G i' you have an,., Guestlons. niease Contac; Apt,: Iv arcia •3reisrud, Environmental t;s'. at C5P or Iv`li".,vreQ Marvnelll• kctinC l-labita'. --onser.•'atior'. SUDerV!DC:, al 7 U4: E57CI -- Sincerer. RoeU',' r-ioerf,E i,;EGlGnai Iv`iai!ager „prlira! oast P,epion Stara Dearinohouse �ln�� -^-. ir.r- �:at:: rn-rti�' '?'i'? LI LI ;rpt -i 1 .l(llil' aflll F�Gs:: ?vlari�Pi^tra,: , I•,r,-r:-�.5,�,::: ';ommunii.� D^yclonmcni Uctlt:-tm^ili �ice_- � ; �. .r� NC'vCnmC: 2U. 200(t 1-071t-la Cass �.ounl . Awn vvlesi;rlml. 1 n•.i ! i rr..suu' 6jl x111-, Strcc.. North `.,mL _ hlooi h�ariine�. ��, U4� -' ical Icarll;,: !,rrrrr;rr: VIA SAX' and U.S. MAIL. Mild I+evn.riv tangy: Mud I RE: Counnr File #GPO.1-000E, DP#05-3024 and SD40� 8438 Novo Project how. SI(I Mull•1 Nimrl'Skmncr Dcar Ibis. Pictras: vvarn 1 Wt arc m-itint to provide comments on the draF initial Study and Mutilated ltceativc' 1'al O'Brien I,rnr.,al Manan.^: Lieciaration for th:: above-rclercnccd proposed Sii^naturc.' Properties development 01. APN's 40E-18(1-010 and 40f!-170-07- iodaLCCI on the Richmond Pari:v✓air in North Richmond. adjacent to the Wildcat Creel: Reeionai Trail. Jur commcnis anniv . specifically to nmcnual imnacts noted in SCCLIOri ,l'I'1 Recreation. The pro.iccl, site is ionated immcdiatcly adiaccni to th; Wildcai Creel: RcLIonai Trail. Li recrcationai alld non-mottir=G transporation corridor scn,in_ tri,: resiccnt: o North Richmolid. Til:' nronOS= nroiccl. Will adu over fly,, hunared rlcv.' resiocnlr Iu. .: traditlonall': InGusinai nCIL'ilborilood. Kdanv of the resid t: %vll! wiSi-, IC'. acccs� tn: r,rL'Cl; NMCtiandr: and shorC111 c ivc,;1 o) t'm- R;chmolid This, Currcml'' mvol%,cs,C1tf1Cr 11 nail mile G'Ctou71 IC: C: Slf ;lail'Cu CroS51n_ a_ T'1I15TlurL' w ,I Gan:'crouz-, m1U-nloci, Crossln" 01 til,' narl:wa_,'. .%.:; II1GICatCC; til 111 C' Chilli I\'lN,"D. th',- GCvClopCr llaS IndlCatCd 1hClr wiilinancsr. to Wori: kvlth me apnronnatC' aL'CnCIC.; l('• ConirlDutc t('1 tR`_' improvcmcni C)i tnl'� Ga11L^.roll:; C::lstin conalllor,. :'.'111C11 �':II! n_' CCrDatCC f1`,' th''. addilmr) of over Il VC hullorcd 11^.x`•' residci S. 1 Ill^. in--rC'a -, H. (h- L1SC'. plea rccruallon Iacilli'N' .'.'lli '_'CT1Crat" lnl(laCts lha', are' not'Cntiah'.' sl'urniflcani unlcs:, mmgal.CG I IlCrCIC1rC. G3Sl I a'.' RCCTIOria: T''arl: 1_1'ctrlCl r_Clucs— tfl,• ITIZILISIoii 0�in^ lUllnt'.111" irllliCatlo-- nlcasurc.. 1111('' til; MN `: kAti'"ation Mcasur_' ZTV a. and h.: n,' nrolcci sponsors %v!i; W'0)'i: W1111 t11C 1_.oun11' a11L ate: Ga`' Y CCIOi,a 1-:i is is ICI m tficl-, _:-fort: it nrCl','ICC SaIC' CroS IP._. C1> MI-1 1'_iCRnlOn �'1rC`:.'a'' a' til,' t"✓IiC;C,: Ira;!. ailL Sllali nrCil'10'- a nor11011 0i tfl'- iMICI'lil:' o otI1C7 I::-iCi11Ci C:CliI;rII11ii1011 V)V,'arC1S till;, CruSSIR-1. ;:. SC: Iortrl 11-1 111 ' Oil Clifton: G r. P.°.' C'i-1.ni : mm�-,a6cr w1i; SAW U1: Imuams U: adIna a subs tankV r 111710^T 0' Ti's .` lls:';, l illu?P_. MIGHT^it, LO 2p 1sCIIi= :r a:io-na'.! 111T' han,: VGu If' in CrLi110 ILiili?`' Iii UTOWN OEM COT1ir:m; jirr� ocvtnsend T sails Dtwtiapment Program \%IanaaeT CC: SL1)cn.-I.$OT JQnrl Giolt Robert E. Dcyit. EBRPD TR-AC i JCRn 31DIE: cj/:C:; I O Furse toiari Jim, fEU I;; S!Gnature '-cm= !,.jr nra!e John Gioia Sunerfisor, Districl One• — ontra Losta ;COLrnty Board n,$ SUDer'!Snr� Y 780 San Pablo Ave., Suite D EE Cerrito, CA 945730 Phone: (510) 374-32: =ax. ;510137 -3429 -- =orwamcd b•r Jonn oc 1 i .1,2000 051:25 AN!,----- BQS DistrictllHClS(;.�� 11x'20;200604:2 Ptv, Tc, Jonn �igia/E^51��Cra.��C Sugjeci Fv,,: (BULK] Signature Homes Nove project Hard cop�1 on your desl�... JupeNlsor.conn Gioia 11780 San Pablo Ave. Ste D E7I Cerrito. CA 94-530 51G-374-3231 Phone 510-37-:--3429 =w,. -- rorwarded by BOS DtstnctI/EOS,--- . or. 11;20(2000 Uti.2o PI,— "Jim Townsend' ' <J7 ovvnsend ebDEft .o rQ I0 =Cl!5�1(�bOS.CO.COR�rc-CGSia.Ca.u'> 11;20,2006 03:43 Ptd: c. "Bnn Dovic-" <6Govie(a)e boars:::.orG'-• �ubie i [BULKi Sionawrc" Homey Nnve DrDiC-,' Dear Supervisor vlDic Atta�-hed please itnd a comment tetter on the Drooc-Sed mit!Gateci neuaiive aecia"ration environmema Go;ument io-the S!onature Homes Development an the former —�-Nar 'Dot orDDert.' on the !iznmon r: Pari< a': adjacent m the Wilc:Cat Creer Trail The deveicDe-E reDresenlative nas !nd:Cated tna, jlGi al.lJr;. Will assist In resoivinc the problem-s witri trail access tG the wesi sicio`: the Damwa'•r. Dui it V:Ouid D�-- n= - t,) niave some ianouaae to that effect In the environmental dczumen' �!9aSE aive me, a Cali C you navE an':' c'Cesti^onssor tnouohis on this alalic` Tnanr..vuu Jim 7ovrnEend _.. i rat: L'veiocmen'. arc am fvIanacer -! E4 ST 6A 1' VUWCIPAi� UT!_1_l. D!STR1,77. Rose Marie Pietras. Senior Pia=-, Contra Costa County Communitv Development D=ariment �,�✓ + ' 4"' - 65 1 in Street, 41h Flocr. North u-ina Mdiarunez, CA 9455? Rc: Miticated 1�ezativc Declaration - Nove. Residential Deveionmeni. Richmorzd Dear )vis. Pietras. East Bay Municipal Utiiiiy District (EB1v1UD) appreciates the opponunn to coma-lent or, the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Nov-. Residential Development in the unincorporated North Richmond area of Contra Costa Counr,'. FBMUD has the following comments. WATER SEP N11 CB EBMUD's Central Pressure Lone, with a service eievation between 0 and 100 feet, will serve the proposed deveiopment. A main extension, at t41t.proiect sponsor's expense. will be required to servo the proposed development Of7-site pipeline impmvemcnT-s. ais(-1 at the T)roiect sponsor's expensz• ma}, be required to meet domestic demands and ft ze flow requirements set by the local fire department. Oft-site pipcmmimpmvemcnts include. Dut ars not limited to, replacement of cxistin�L, water main: to the nroiect si te. Vrhen the development pians are finalized. the pro.iect sponsor should contact EBlv1UT>'- N,ew Business Office and reoucst a water sen ice estimate to =icrmint costs and conditions for providing water servic: to the proposed development. incinccrin{• ane I nstallation of water mains and sen ices rcouires substantial icad-time•, kvhich shnul,J he provided for in the project sponsor's devclopment schedule. Thc projeci sponsor should he aware that EBN,iUD will no'. install nipin_t_• or se lee in contaminated soil or eroundwater ('if groundwatcr is rm=n at anv time durI111: tlic ;car a! the depth piping is Io b:. installed) that Must 62 handled as a hazardous ,vast,-. o- thz( m;l,.- hc hazardou-. to the. health and safety of construction and maintcnance Dersonnci WCarin" _ Ct-vcl I:', t,zrsonal nrot^ctiyt� eouipmtnt. 'BiViUL, will not install Dipine ar servi�c,- in areas where eroundwatc- contaminant concentration:, cx::ced sDeciflcd limit icr discha= w the sanitar, scwc- systcm and trzaimeni Dmn:",. The project sponsor must submit copies to 7B1vfUD pf all i:nov,n inrarmation reRardint° soil and croun6water aua.wv within or adiacen'. to th:: nroiect boundara- and a icual i suTricient. comnictc and,mcc-iflc v,-nt,Lt:rj remcciauor; alar; e taoiisnine� the iS E!E VFU;T�;T, r)AN'j ANN' cA ?tFG%4;jr. TOLL FF..( BG%•-1J.Ep6'(::. Ros,- Miarje Pietra . Senior- Planner VCtoPcr 27 —'1000, niethodolog'., manninc alio cCSt2r: o'_ all P.C,tsaar`. CVSTZrM.� rcr IR_. remo-v,a . u2aim^-n- and disposw w comarninaizo soil and gounowater. NTtl1 v4'lli not utsignpipini n} St-,.Vi= until soii and c'roundwate; ctualin; data and -,mediation tiian.-- nave rein received and rcvtewed, and Vdili not start unCeraround wor.i, untii rcmeQtatloIi rids DeCr, carried oui and docttmentatjon of the eIfectn'en�ss of the rt mediaimn has been recenved and Tt!vitnvtd. If no soil or groundwater quality- 62-13 exists. or the i.niormation supplied by ffit project sponsor is insufftejent, EBMUD may retluire the proieci sponsors LO n--rform sampling and analysis to charactcrizt th:: soil and eroundwate;.that may b encountered durine excavation or EBMUD may perforn� such sampiinR and anal;'sis ai the project sponsor's experts,. If evidence of contamination is discovered Burin^ BBMUD wort: on the prt?iect site, work may be susrended until such contamination is adequately characterized and remediated to EBMUD standards. MATER CONSERVkTJOn Theproposed project presents an opportunity to incorporate water conservation measures. EBMUD would request that the Count}, jn:aude in its conditions a; approval a reouirement that the proiect sponsor comply witi; the Landscap: Neater Conservation Section of the Municipal Code of Assemb)v Bill 323. Model Water Efficient Landscap: Grdjnance (Djvjsjon 2, T' ie ?3, Cajifornja Cod_ of Recujatjons, Chapter %. SPetjom 490 throupn 495 . EBMUD staff would appreciate the opnonunjn' io meet with tit, prc),jcci sponsor to discuss water conservation programs and best manapemcnt pr-a--rices appiicabi: to the integrated proiccts. G, l:ev objectjv;. of this discussion will bt to exoiort timely opponunjtjes to er:pand water consenaiion via early considcratioi, o)rHB 'vTUD'S `-conservation programs and best manaf:emeni praztize.s appiizabi.. io tltc prn.icct. If you have any questions conccmjn� this response, oicase contact Dz- id J. R-Finstrom. :senior Civil Encineer. tVater Service Pianniri al 5101 2or-i S� SIncerelt 'ATilllam I:. rkpatrir-k Manaeer of V;ater Distribution Piannirir. Y,,%M-:T?:S:si: s6Gc �1A-oa:: _�. Sanatlirt T.ro Tor,,t`: 4670 Willov.! Pass I:oad. ;quite 200 Picasanion C.4. 4'508 ` s ?oto SLUfv-'_GRIM-_ Ri�HiJOiv E; "r,'_.=ORiJL�.u'K-,. CjClo 2—. _ . -100(, r Ms. Rose. )baric. Pietras Contra CORM County Community, Development DeDartmen1. 651 Pin-- Strcct, North V,�ink, -nb Floor Martine:, CA 0-155') Dcar Ms. PimraE: Subject: SIGNATURE PROPERTIES' PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Counn, Fife No. GP#04-0009. DN05-3024 and SD40?-8938 We have received your notice of Public Reviev,, and intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigated N,-vaii.ve Deciaratfon and have• no objection uo the -acre combined parcels idcntific.d as APi� concepl of rczoninr the 29.2 4O8-]80-01() and 40 ,-170-O 71. Hnwevcr, we respcctzuliv request and ` strongly urpe that at the appropriate time. Richmond Sanitan, Service he afforded an opportunity to participate in the desian rcviev,• process tc, ncip assurt that adequate waste morapc and access far waste coilection activit.tes arc provided for in project dmiclopment. v Cry iruIv/yo urS. Sila"m P�f ohcr� Gcncr al N/lanaL,.— Y: c' P A t< Novem'ae-2&2006 i; Beivedere Avt, Richmond' Cf 44801 Phone;Ma7.: 510-235-2S35 .:12Ia1l:Cp��2�f[�a'eaf[11LIfti:.I1�i Ms. Rose Marie Fietras Contra Costa County CammunM, Deveiopment Deni t5l Fine St.,2nd Floor. North Wing Wlartinez. CA 9455 Dear Ms. Pietras: T'RAC. The Trails for Richmond Action Committm, is wriunr to oomrnent on the Qctober 20()() initial Stud), and Mitigated Negative Deciaration (IS/MAID) for Signature Froperti=s' proposed Novee residential pm'ect ad'acent to the Wildcat Cre-&, Re 91 Trail east of tine P.ichmand Parkway. kzs1b-,6c imoam The ISIMND should bc revised to address the potential for adverse. HA.sthetic. impacts on users of Wildcat C=V Regional Trail. Them are-no 'tandsca-Dittg details Cr etevation drawings portraying buildings and other structure; nearest tie trail so a reviewer cart understand the aesthetic impacts for ' trail users. Notealso that the Pniiminan° Landscape Pian appears to show two connections mtri th,,L Wildcat Creel, Regional Trail although only one is iatreied `connection to cX:isung trail'. TRAC recommends adding a Mitigauor, Measurestmiiar u:, L:. providin-V for MBRF'-D revirv; of tht detaiied Landscam Plans. 'ubiic ,Services. Recreation Circulation and Transnorraiion impac', Thank you for including tht haeitcround information on the W-iiicicat Creel, kegional i rail and $av Trail provided in TRAC's R!Y)ID5 incr. Please note, however, that Pace o' the. Ii/MNL should be updated to recogmizt...that: 1. tine Vv_iidcat Creel: Regional Trail undemass of the. Richmond Parkwnv nov• is imnassabic vca:- round due LD accumuiated mud and waLer, rather tear, seasonafiv biccicd (iast Paras anh o1 vnf- =,5. and Republic Service-s has comoieted the Paas: 1 landfill Bad- T:3ii and will comni— tht cnUr, three-miie iandtill ioop durinE- 20071 (CIrst paragraph of page 5;. See tine attached current Richmond Bad Trail map: Curnd"', ven• few p-„opie. use th:- Wildcat ReMonai i;ail :zst of tr' T-arkwat' because ii i. no; re accessibie from BBP.PD',, StaotIIg ar=, and there _-e no residenLs aion^ the trail. T h. .,NhvL proiecl will drdrrtaticaliv chance the situation by piaclm� 1.W) residents OT; the t Mil Inland 0?..bi,,e Pari:v,a,;. Fear-round blaci;age. o` tate Pari waL underpass fc- the Vrjidca: Creel: Reg ona.'• Trail:, mcam lira! i=:. dog wa&cr, bicvciist,; and halm strolicm residIrE in the 1VC)v proiect arc ii�;eiz, to dash across the Tari:way in order to reach the. Sari ;ramp sec La: =1;ai; fOr t3.zrCIS ' and rccr^atior:. rather. ihz-, i aian,2. 2,haL-ii1t1e deLou-, Ill Gude-to r0ach rn'-; shoreiIn2. Ties craa,.eT signit IMID .:.�.: �ecL1071 gill PLiDi1C' Ce C'ice, - the nroitc %would ".at, ail Ll ::IIr°: C Inti: IOr taPt 0; L - �n}sIcali� altered noverllrnental 1'Ect1.ILIe rntRAr trial; :'3iC1P.� :1 OC 8 c.L111C O. adlLl i CCS I.'. kilted of Inlured SYmffi 705SUt2 the 'IF-ar!7IVrrl','; JeCC107i �`.d. 172nsportdilon'i--X 1-i -- tet7—Ol:'.: Cita-ll' WOUid SUDS IIIILiull ha aras" and ' co71111ci with adomcG ooti^ItS. Uiar'io nr nro_:ram suppa-,Ling a)L.=itaJv- Lr anspnrtation"; - - _ . F Section F�ecreavon -- ttie Drc?leer would`-require the construction car exparl,zi.on o; _ ".' . or f n ° o o C recro..•ational faciiitis i..� i.... til: propos.,.: 4�-ilccat :..re,..•; Regional Trail ov���s_. o the - Richmond Parkway and Stc.ion XYD Mandatory Findings of Sigmizance - the. Dr01e_: Nvould "navte emvironmenial eff-acts which will cause si-unificant.adverse. enc^t-7 on human treinRs". ! if ' Tnese impact`s and the need for mitigation should be recognized and translated into an enTor,--.ahie nu.LiQaLion measure reauirinn Signature Hones to participaty in funding the proposed Vvtldcat Creel, Regional Trail overpass of the Richmond Parkway. Tire IS/MND merely states "The. proiec[sponsors have indicated that thi y will wori: with the appropriate agencies to he'tp remedy' tine ezistin2 conditions." Cumulative lmnacL: The ISIMND does not consider thee cumulative.impacts of the Signature Horres proicct cornbined 1 the KB Home. residential project on t.h: south side of Wildcat Creel: and all elaDmenLc l unema} , proposed and reacouabiv anticipated in fire vicinity. including 5ianature's proposal for additional residential dcveioprnent on tilt north side of Vv ild= Creek_. TI-AC would appreciate. receiving tht proposed final IS!MND, staff repor?s and notices of pubii: htmngs concemi.n, appmval of this protect addressed to: .Bruce l+evaen.?) Btivetier;fttv..Richmond. CA CLW,7 Wriitnsv Dotson. 41 C1P.ienicins Waj. Richmond. C.A,9-1801 i pan;: you v-n' much. Sinccrei`'. Bruct Bf:yzerl. TPLAC Chair Auacilrncnt P,iCI1771C?I1L ]'i3, Trail mar Cc. :iuper.�iso- .i c?nr Gioic 4ti'nitne DoLson .iim Tmvnsend - EBRFD y�l i"y. .J1..;.� flit >t..rr¢' qi i,:h t I;, t I:" _• I_I,S'� �t`"`ir`..�ry e�fy{r. � * 1��r! y 3117`rry'��� •' '1 I�j M�u� t �i:{il M�'11I ,i�/I,ryFI'11 'r ,� M,�� •� ., }� 1i�1Sy.iy+ f F IM+�yt„u,7y tc< ��i���J�t,it � ._�.. .. .. •,a,+;1,1 i�¢Wd r ¢qly i mi; i i r , IL�".T�OIr< �r � � �fli�;(y r I Y ! 3 IhS, eK 'to .. {rt l I,, .t bl'. g f 10.;;er ta,wJ41ii1`'l�t'L' 4U :` 1� r i3 Y-1;,i i N t 1 tt 'H. irY '11,11+41 4. •drt'47 .I Jnr t.�l •� i r�r }ir X5'1 rt J Y rti n;+ a� .n Yn +�1r,6dal?r ` lj'4f3t1 .YYI1Sri. Rut �.` I, .kla V+ II N t r �•�7t iy'��i 'i �t•� ll:„i.i+,'M1G, iris V,.:r l• f. r 1.'rilrtr ",IG`.._k ru' ! 1 Ear ra Fa►nt c.� ompletE. �p},¢}umv rW « tnN� ttt gran, n+•+�� /v m�omniot w 4j }"'+� S�hoTr[tt18'' `i :.lig----: IIV �.[41�r 1�,r�y+J�Cy(Mt�� i. 1Mnt� r SKI V f Cann-ctcr Ira,ir Traci , I tlt tritir CampletG :, r Y n^ l ¢ - ants/ r✓ � t i.+��r, 't�'. C1per; JOS,. . •i;.` .E. �'r, >t ,, _.� 1'rp t Fy.• �� V rtes Water Bodies ., q;`rl' �,•,cr' i • Harr Sad,Pab10 West Cou La dfii ; nt SAN P.kSI LO �'. "•ji r ' ei�raIL'•-� ��I�•: �. DaVl. _ Geriruact . � M}y t n• W. I' •'����N"'_ , � Y IRT/j� � .�r4 !'� 's ii rJ„ cv c 1 �J `r-i rjl �r, _ Rirnmmo = i_ 1Nec,i�a�aonal:. � ? Dilm 1�..._._.. _... I r j�y f im n r r. is it fT1A1't C� ;�rH 6 fly.cl,. J vHRll. YYpi�tial 1 r.,. ,i {1" del fvnrt IVC 18112 MananbnvPKwv .t = — rsee Ntanr�. g ���,`I(�1p `. Yrr ea ih _ i J4rR� (,4 Il�rfiVro'Id� �r fCC10�r, F. '1"[` !c� - I Rfl ''•'''.1 .It(:'',q �w..b 'IKy iI .�¢:ll ,t .1..d+,,`1•I r;,y �� ,... �" - -- I ^r•, 1. p r, C Shcor-eJine wfo y�nai. r3�3i1C1E �I hi>ir(�X��abq� tt 11j' t a tj� + j r ”" ' Eaint Fant dwsms hcant 5himacz a Farem _ �t Pa parr' t✓a n`, ... GSA 7 Brooks tstaT, Redo a ''re59rVE '� rte�tona' \t , finite; 'ImuH ^ =. , _.. .... ------.............._.. i -- ---- LAW C77=7,3 Ci ^+^ T tLr— is:�iri .bir �; KOS' n PnD�rSSSDN I CDP.S D;°.Ti01: vArlV"LLE OFFICE. 1vrLt.M unc6r',1r.. 279 FRD TI STP=7 P,(TuC7.J.MC uvn L1urlts r..Ymc &�.y`�1 .+':�:5 NIT.Z*tiI,`!h u.tF•r.'Z .LL,ixl.iPl7ANU,9�:;2b-D'sl: MICA tt:L. Itfcsurn.C,ftalf.t ..,.;[n1�1 e3-•59,°. BAUMADtnuLJMVT— Novamk- -21• 1-006 RostrT hi.FAxvrti ALLAA C.MWWL NAPA,VALLEY()MrCE STDME+!-1 bumi f r._0?t r'^..S sotmiurj Z Z AMOM/,1SFnK. 1r_ 0 Mats:STSCr'T.Su,,a 21 MARMLvcvNtFfI1L'Nr �LIFDRxza.9bi7= ;.Ana ?,--S,Zsu�r� Eft:;S.Du�1+e' ?�'LEPHOrt='(7071453-044� LAMtMWb-DOM, 'r;.-.:f'7M 90-55i7 ANs*&L-6AVCRL18rtumfAr SALW IS.Net. F�kPb+; ' Umvlli; m Latwr. Lnnr r.Gaoae� TC`; Rosc Mmie Piezas F .-- N0.. Comrs cana,DUAN Fuon:: Kari R. fianaDle PACU: L.Pgfl� �iS51Si8Ili fire:-cov:rsnecfl su&TE,—T/ IMgCC Corporarior. -i our NQ.: our ril_s: CTP04-000 . DPQ -3024, and SD E493E T'i�av� find att$CB�d our iett_r o`this date .�ga;ain lvoto- o Lubii= 'rci^eu,and int_rt� in • daull a MiriRatCG hCB8:1•:C r1=i ratlo❑ In the abo`'_ rna=7—r. OR1liINAl Rr r'O�LO�'BY NiAll ' COATrID�t�iIF.LIT<" NOTICE i nc zmormalron cnnfe:nea' rr li7t� f:_;1n11f[ Comt;tunreDitpr rRa•; p[ P'DIeCI[G DL• fcr errorr,�-cites: ❑rein' me Dtrorn^.v rreri: r'rroovcr nnvrle➢f3 7lfr eommunfconor, Is rnrrnaec ani;'for me use v;IRL Irt11lVl(AlCJ D�trinm RamEG ODD I- i nc orrvi!rpC; err ser waavec ir.' 'rrtuc e+rht commumcaaon, hovm;-. beet:rem,ov mcsrmii (i tnc mrson acrVCii"recervznLr tet:- raLcrmit^ Cr Cr:.. amt-reaarr r tnr 1ccslmiir Is ne!1hr rnamco rc`tnrer..'. or Inc emniavP: c-nr[nf rrmonsibiF In aahrY•;r In me namra—c)Dr.^.r.'. an u c, ausemrn imn, distrioufinr e- convinP c' in:. eommunieoriDr 1. srrteti, nrDniD11[l /' N-Cv nave reeetvr: fn;: L'oMMU tcmrnn m error, DiGasC mrmccraleiv not f'ut o✓fci[nnor:,anc rGurn Int orl7tnDi cammvrtcannr rn+c-- by mai; /norv. Vo Q. WiLuAm LiAcm h- Fxmz-, ��l Dam",,-L —.O.-Bc;zM J. SQ 2 BUtRA�tI)irvaLJ :: N 0 M,rl z 200 F,()6trTK PAW= NAP---,VALLEVDMC� m P�- Bum MrMr ;03 a Ms--v 5Tmv=StM 2 MAXIM LYMWGHeil.C-kLrOjwA 0457""amms.2i"--Ky . . (7071961"M6:," "Lwjw 2-bwm AWkA.CjAV;WA RN AMMAN be"Vilit Dr�atten- Lam r- Facsimfle and 'U.S. 70121) Ros-- Marie Pictras Schi or Con= Corm Country 65I Pint Street, Na, wing, 4th FL lviardnez- CA Qld-z53 R-z- Notizz-, of'JIVblic Review and intent to.Adopt E Wli*t� XT-Fativ1- DZziaratior, DPO--;-3024, and SD 0S-8938Your riles: OPO4-0009t Our Ciltm: IWIACC Corporation Please bt advised that our f= r--presents D,/1ACC Corporation, i;�hlclll) Gvzratz� a r.mgIry .industrial operation di ty ad lactn't to and riord, c), thz Mrm=,- Tic IMACC facility reconditions :MTM, u.5--d 5 -gallon drum. tha, nzwc DTvvIOUS),,, cantainBci painu. ciizmical-s, imings food produ=u m othC7 fillid, 07 iadinm fc.- r:-u- c by thci1T- cmmzrs or sail to Ei third pa)�,, orcrabol'is ar� ci-carly. industrial in nature and, 14�:� al'i hcav-,! industrial use..-, art-=--mliy incomiDaub.- witl-i adia--cni residential uses. Tln=t IS F- V::M! real potential for conEhi-- bm=crn th=f future rcsidcnvs and tht IMIACC Corporation facibin,. thi,-- ap-pilzatim, S=iL" F, General Pian Amtridmml to chain? : the suojnnz, pr horn 1,:zvy Industrial tri. Resibcmial use, with littic rczarb fo7 the unpact-7 to the =rnainmz inausma) r3aTati., sumundlrlF does not me:15calh, E[66rtss 1h:: notcrit I lal nt2ativplffc-= or MACCI-F :,N-IsLu' 12 adiazt-m'. a.-:: oij unc. r--siin, *L" of m7*01=1LL. 0-, Lh�: pj - respdctIul`t reales thai P.n F. bz repul—c, to studl, furih:- the pmznlia!i tho 2-ic)nm- fVol 'Zmb0:' ?G. 2000 Irn;^:intio> o �Pi?D"8ti�ln at to IIS �� C' 'Cn-nnr or_ __ nates abD� tt e I1Lji4C fa:iiM'. rrecanisltlo used nalior! steel C-IIII:: that 12.e�'= previousi� cantairted t ?varier% Oi itulo e- sern!-soiic iadingS, Cnvirontnental iuws and DOT rcguiatiors require that ti.ese contairzrcannot unless ti e�' a, cDmpiete}� --mmv, and in mos! cases. drip on'. in Som: casts, resiauc fro,r L1 CviDUS nroduee adheres to talc siaewalls and borrorn OF the atoms. 'nut tre vrodulcn .IS seln -sniid or am ant r:_rhar_ adileriq. only rn, the bonom o the cantairm au int transport. i,--e contair. - arc DiCked uv with IMi.ACC. tru.=:, from various Custom--n in locFal0w &ound til: Bal' ?.Tez. Ir man`• case: these Containers b=iona to 1= SUZC1T1;. accol113t for wtlom INL4CC pro«de these reconditioning services, In othz- instances, NACC Durmast: drums for resaie after, thcy nave reconditioned them. DNLACC`s se17,11cc normalh, provides pleb.-up and delivor1' of the drums bacl� to irs tolzl Tet 75- aallon drums arc' mctived at IMACC's it;ciilry on Central Street in North Richmond, where are of-loaded, inspe;,ted and son--d according to rumre use. Nian', o-, tele drum; ao dimcth; to the reconaltlonlnL Tacilin, on Tliwstril_rR Avzznuc where tilt recondiLionirL�, process begins. F;eonCUlloninLT con5l5t5 0 SUDIZZ=n- tr..- cnntaincr to a- burninc opc-r'ation in which tri:, dnirn enters a convmr iire titrouzh an industrial hian tem>;eraturc Dven and whet= the exterior paini and am' interior tsroduct are reduceG to ari ash,. The droit trcr� enter: a biammF mcc'rlanisrr, which removes an1_' o;the residues and ;Sn�> leis frorn ti:t burliz- operation. M-x,- tat arum i; reshaped to rano,,'t amv damant Lo or ends o!,the contase-. and enc next Station: il-su tb: drum_ fo- ieai:�S. if reouired, a Hnhz is trier anniied to the interior of tet container, and the axterior o- tnt contain:r is painted actor dine to tilt' eustorner-,' coin- sp-cinralions. TRt entire citaninp oroccEs IO MarIV ftdcrat, St--t_ and iccal-statutes and ordinanze�. Tp._ .LaZLIln' IS .SUD!PZ: 10 'CMOnIC =D:OtiOnS Cly' til:.' Eav Areg 4'.i, Ouallt-, IViclrlSc:ITlchi TllStrtct ! 1� ZD! and DtPci- Onvlrohlr=a[ a^__i1Dla oncra?eZ. tho faclliry a: rua.11 in Oa.Si coMDiaimi, Turn local busine:,SeS about nolSeC. and o6ors ❑urin Qa'r^u nE 0DCZaLJOIL. IA'LACC opera=— a IirS: Shia Sk'Il11 snv: ; crnnio tcs durinl:, th- O,i_, tc. ✓Ce1t' a ci unload drum-, ane F Second Slll`t of -l-vl'Crir.> =DIDV._S who operate1i0I71 D.rn. Lo '1:01) a.1T.. d.urlrlE.� wll1Ch t1m, t^_ urOullCUDI! llneS D^Crait, SLIIitIll° t.I'.zs5 onoraim . L0 tC_ nizhnimt hours nay resulttd lr? E dramau, TtQL':110n 1p ri01;,_ and DQ01 comwairl-. 1 hI_ t DLT LO lnE T2C.i th- th-rd u, c==LIV e'er,' ret=•' res' '=iCc_ Ir. th•: ar-= and mo- O1 th' Stu?Cundir.s:, busireE.1-7. ?rn va 1n': c near- :a:aril. dL:ink IhL�,C :,IOLLr _,= 0uer_t10 ll` il� C__r 3IiC 'v','1)( C<7rltiit LC: L ^Do:: nci--hbo- IG" tr.'- SiL•_DUIIC1Mi DUSICPS:-S. Shcul^ ,.':t aDl_C�ri'_ re;ld�nt!sl DrD!t=: a:' 3rpr01'�i . l)\'.�.'� . Wli) COiiiliiu� L0 Strivt If,,, D'_. 1VQl" ml ?G. 201i6 goad neta70 miu-1T,❑m/aTr� n}�!�r� - �r, v^ f1O L14i la�trvlV ULI cn, �la...n-+_ a1r4CtI ' EQ1?.QQnt iG tT:° 7ronos r �I....II _ ss�'et� bUTG-11 CD IMAC-C an0 atn2" surrounatna thaU.mal us t1T "z—, --,M0is tP.relOre rz:Q11IrQ7 to Q:.eiullnQ ti:f IISiIIr:2 an 'LI —wnt 0 an LO 1CQntITt' DI'o1Q:t iT:$CUI'."� tha:, cflrt mtnirniz., the Ilnpac-. of u "`=ss"IC:P.C�S ❑L Ii:: 5iu-7–C jQ1PE industrial operatICM. CE`lA Guidehne-q r'eauire the preparation of an Environmenmtal � nQct I�enf-ri. A ne�ativ; deciliration is a statement that merely de>cribes "tn= reasons wily a �:oposed project will not have a sipincant effect on th:. environment and tuerefor� does no( require tnc preparation of ar LIR." � 4. mitigated neaavvt dect$ralion i5 simila statemeni,.which connms that certain project revisions ortnitigation m:astir-s ns�': been incorporated into the proiect, which avoid or mitiQate the impacts to a point u'her--cicar)�, n- significant impacts may occur.' in either case; such a d:termination car, be trace only ii til-re is no substantial evidence in .the entire administrative ;-cord be>;orc -tile lead aeenr-y that such an impact may occur. Or the other nand, a iead aQrricy must find that a urol-L may nave a St- irlcant �nect on the environment and thereby require an Elp to b: prcrjued for the project whir-- any o; th= fohowma caricunons Occu: Tne vroi-ct ha= possibie _nvironrrentai effects whim arc indi-vidualty limited but cumuianvz)y considerable. ",�'umulativei y considArabla "tncan:, that the. incremental eff-ct_� of an individual nroiect an crJnsilierabl° wt:cr vit!web in connection with the effects of pas. projects, file criect_: c otile current prc)ieCt., and tris effect-; of DrObable r"uture Dro1QcL;.... ' Th� e e ': J n v r. Ors_ nvironm tial ti ci o 2 prole^' wi[i caul subs.anUsl ao� et:E cn human bcines, :itner dir:=tip' o; indirectit �.n environn.entai impact repo, 1=I3;i i: :cauired subs`,t,ntial e�'iccrce in �,e record suppor`Ls e lair arQizment that siErnlI1:dn( irilp8cts maz occur. Thu ; Mrrr �Sr1C:71:. 111 Ih:. rccoTd supDo:s an 0pposlr: conciuslcm. tht C'c) l?y must Drzr)i-r $I' �.. nt fair argument siandard Crc:Fl.c- a vt:7), lov., tnreshoic >b- -zouir= prcoarnuor, of an uuioeiines Pubiic Rsatr_:, Cob_ 21064. se_ else the sp�ciit_ !eaviren ert_ for e riri _d ^atty° ccciaretior, se iarth L`ciou ill Lill.corrast cndcr,c=. PRS'21080(�j(1) uuiCciirc=. G i�0651c No�'emc.- 20, 2006 Iac-- tl; mla,az- Sc`- iOV; ICLa' ZTriz,. Q.Ualln�C' QtiT-��:T. u"e�-rti �JilfIClI�_ ,,ICItnC4 on tHl extent o'- pC:enT18i t MELCTU. tI -`• --cUnP.'.I U:iI 8 Cwt IC�-VIC�P.^� SIIDwiP.�. that ° sizniI,zan'. Impaci may r,-sul: ITOIII tnt pro-Ie'. uIiC0IIR3Qtcrw' opinior 5ubmirled by an enner consultant. and cieman-si:ating dial si-Tliltzan- i IITIF--S EII ! OCCli_. I� tr�n`=r$11 CDTI�IIYSJ�ra, n�r]Q:'IIC` IP iavoT o £111 r - lid LfltS ..55. it is that 6 "fair argument" can bC maCC that si=Ificant cnv'ironn::7, IIT1naCt: OCCur Lra n tht t]rOICCi.. IQi the fOIIOIAIIRr- reasons: 1. imngeF ITt.cl: The Frnie>rt 14 a1' EzI)ese• Sensiiive xccentcirs to SubatannHl PDiiutallt COUcentrations. As noted in the initial Stud, and Mffiization I?=imilLion for th' Nove project dated October, 2006 ("NUS"j the conservation, elem=rl of tiP 2.00;-2020 Contra Casta County General Plan inoEudes Air Resources Poh."ies and lmpiernentauon Measures. Trit Polices and Measures that apply to this pro : tect include Paiic; -10� "Land uses which are sensitiV: to air noliuuor shall b.- separated from sour--es of air pollution," The MCC fazility utilizes -chemicals and Indus=jal, hIIIh-:.rrnnerature ovens in order-to recondition the used calla-; drums, 4�. uritis most heater industt�', this facilin, emits some pollutant: into tint air, Vlhii� all o these _missions a-e rnonitorec b� 1:=- B .kQ1v2D and e 'er-' pre:autior, is taicee tc avoid emissions. the i:aciiin, rnav occasionally, albeit infreauentiy cmn OQCir ths. a^e obis.�tionamtc to normcowner-. LI�L=�C'2 bei=an oprations Ell their ioC8tior, aver 1-5 Veal's ago unarm, the nciia-f that 1rI_N' tv'e-_ continuing an tMistina industrial use in 2_preciop-linantiy industrial arzzL. .4s wit-, ani' Reay,:, industial use. there --%ISt". sornc rlsl: 01 or Other Zau5e of==:ss ats:,h=r ITC,-7" the 18C11It'ti'. PlacIna homes ci]reCtl_Y adia-crii LO tht Tac 1lIn: witholli. uIl iioeQtlffiz bLi1:e' In�«ES_ L:, .':sh that rAsidznu wih CC sub-'= 1:C tl:_se Do=tlal .'.XCeS, ci' ' ar: Air kQsourccs ttnDicmenlation Mcasure 1,'-dm rccu re:. Lat Counn' lc "rcvi'tvr mala: 6e!veioprn_nl 2ppilCation tp ensu--' Cn3i buff`- zores Furc -provided be tit'ecn ai; tinl.iutior; sot�:ce_ i>TePu�ays. inaustn err.) o- sources or nazardot,s tlolilltior ane s�r_siti� _ recentc- such as hcspil Is. convalts:::v norneyand -esiaerces. V"Tillie 1h %e,tiP Teniati�'e Nup sito�a:s some hurler arca betv�eer, tht: Il�fi4C'� prop:ny and tis^ 17I'ODOSed home--, th--rf is no analysis in the en;'ironmentai doctuneni to SLIM t'rlat dii: builer IS SuIticiem-to 7T 0=1.IIIc' 7tsIdent Ir, tis:: cvzm o: an aoclCcntal QIScnargC- Gulic: oetv.'ee.n industrialird re Ii ntiai uses 1�..iso n ess�Ztia;. e i_mcu o the ivc11; Ftis:,7ionc ece,'eiciJiren: roi� �.o ilOMEL, Gulae NrrOnmer:7 Vua!!^ (°' roar_• et n.LDIra Aric„ Circi ;nc �oiiic-,.. _m, n P� - ��- - rr mf1 fq�LUCl1TrA::, JB]]UE.r.'�Q�_ ami...— ♦,♦.r.� .�...... fv�vct;lac; ?r, 21006 smo"v T r2 1i sd!tvell umert Stoat� irvz areas a,n: .;si r., i:��: 1,T;: bts: miions u) ca:n o:- th, I11r-- arta:. C: tP� I"ir0t7uS.=C DiDI":� atlC'. lI: llt1=�._`_ %��liii aI'w ICh:3t�d 1r1 .t1rc2 C. Tri: Ind Tu S:. 1'1aI L- I .nat.ions/:ntitierren! �'roc_3' C113n: G: llh Reaavelopffi:nt Stud— describes Area IC as follows Area C is prcdomintlnti"! designated ro- ceavn' indult iai uses. Liar,l industrial us-- arz J=,mi led adiacem to tri.' Wild! Crc.Al� that senaraic�, Area C fi mr Msidemial dcveiopm--m 11-11 Area D. to addition, the sites with public usw, havL recreational and public designations- (-mphasis added.) Tne Redevelopmem Study zzla riy anticipazcs that s-araban ". to c^ provided between the heavy industrial uses and the residential dev-iopment. Ph acemcni of 370 names within Brea C fTuscates the vcni reason for the creation of Area C. Tr.- Redevelopment Study docs note test "Sianatua_ Properties is looking to develop e 60-acre sine, direaiy to the north of thc.RB Homw prated,;, aiang Edchmond Parkway and north of Vvildc-at Creek."' It notes that this would he a,tnaior Maidcntia ll protect in thc. industrial area of worth Riciunond and that Signature Pmpmies tribe also set aside z portion of the arra for Mail deveiopmcnt. Such retai) development rov, have �`rovided tlhe rccessan, buffer between tris neem' industrial uses and tri: toroposed residences. Hi mwsvcr, no such Dllth--i is pTdtlosed w. a Dari of thio d--x`lopmcn' appiication. bapact III,e: The Praiect mws, Result irn Comntaiar, from R-mideut Rc�srdi��Obiectionnble',Oaors. �. noted abov: and in til. M)D, cxistinE sources of odes lomat t�ittiin tre Amid,:i area mal' effe::? rtsid-inial Oiai wauiC Clccupy ta-- proposed tthe I�i4CC site is na, gcnera1)y E soui�.c of objectionable 000rs; the risk of i ZICIental discharges in inherent in heaN7,! industrial uses. Tthc NDN-D list the W:si Counth F\.:SDIi c_ `8.^IIIty, est CountW StE Vv'atz, Di.str,:,t Irzaimcni Tian`, tPC W--s! ContrE Costa Sanitary Land, rill. the Ch--�Tof Reflncm'. =6 LT 1---=ra) 'CT:::« izaj are iQ�ntiIl�daL Dot"ntial sources of odor:, but Lntre is n0 rn ntloT; Cli tnt TIvI4Cf� SIt V✓ni.i; I; C10S'Si t0 the DroDQs=d residences. Odors t7oITi paints. srnoi:e, a=cIQzrtta! ZIr=. an-, ?u:nc mai, zmanat_ iron, tht DyL4CC site in varuing d areas. P,t e TiirilIA11Ii.1 v,ts ;uouic therefor; reoucs that til. IM11111CC sit: bcc sp_--ii-icaliy iisted it anv cee6; disclosure ;tfltefL;rtl CC. nOCIr,' ItitLlr_ DCo'?i�aP.t_ of tI : pTU}�;i t"a, Dao ; Qom: 1'C their oroMmin,to the I1v1ACC a:iiin . Fin)reDar.. worth F,ienmon� A='c.Vcimpsrcm � tz Sruo., oa=c 911 ini;iE!Stub} anehzicieated i�eg�tr�L'c:mrztion in_Novt T ro:cc� Gciao, _.. 1✓3 1'Tr:ct-�L~ 1II9G6.6r. Novmb.-i 0, 2006, Liprto I'. SnDU.IC, C" nOTICt mal, mcmasln� tIl" ilIIinL`_� G .�511:'r iL; cul a Czn CC aP.' 1nClLlstl'la us. will -mr ' rdsuli irl ar; 1nCre�ec IltiiMrIz, Gi -UMDlgirT?'s rdii' il:: :'"51CdT1t, abUui tl:c Ir1QL`a I'� us, , This V clearly ar, imnaci or, VC 1nduSTl�i tl . tllfl! caiTCCL TI CI; ab111Tr' 10 7,,=-, folrn thzir op--ratloris sill-i ntl�' aDCi lxll�il0ut IlltaiMllori. 1 I]_st, lrrl'Gacu snouid bt careftlilv scrutinl,ed whzn�v�r an IIIclluulal par-C! :onslGr'- rc"resic'mrial us" 3. mvact 171T.s: Th!! Troier, h2F s potential to Create a Significant hazard to the Public T hroucwh the Routine TranlsnorL rise or Dlisnosal of Hazardous Tyiaterisl. Tile MND ass--m that til-- proposed nrolect wili nol creat` a `sistlincan: - n;;ZS d to &.: public or the environ=-, titroup the routine n=por'' use, or aisposal of ha7grdous mat:ria1." This assertion is based on the fact that tic proieet is residential irl nature and that "the transport, use, disposal or a--mc--mal reiease of' az dous materials to iimimd- to normal residential use_ and landscapir.2 needs."1G �iowev_r tits IvLNL do_s not consider the tact that ilaz�rdo wast-es arc roullnei�' trarlspdrted in and ou of all the industrial parccis in the ate_,. The addition of 370 residences -iri thi: industrial area inorzases th:. likelihood of an automcbiie collision with I. vehicie carrying ilaZaldous mal—mals. Some consideration should be glwm to this inoreaved risl: in tic C--- ' anaivsis ti. impact ISL: The Praieci Confiicu with tine ReheveiODM tz; Sruo`' i:or tate Nortb Richmond area, Tre aropo:_d Droieet ccnlilcis with the F,edeveioprr t Stud-v In fila':. trc = R�ac�eiopmtmi 5tuci'.' aIlI1CIDatcs e buffs` of lull-, indus ial uSe cety den tt:e hea:-, inalat ie; us-: and anv residence . )ve sUcij Duffer i, provid_ci in rho DroaosC; Dlar.. ndrwc in Cilarter III of the Redevcioomen; Study. lee.., A, B and C ' ,�Dre;�rli filc industrial poi-tior. e� i.;on F�i�runol>c.' Hisioricaliv, thdse who purmnased propern' in areas : B and C did sc) in antimnation cv, rerrorminz. indusiial operauor_s In an sroa 1T_ (o- reiativ clti ITeej of sarlsitive re =1ory Tru-- Is ar, imnortsal consideration for ani' heap indusiria) use. L- sensitive rZ^-ptor- move -ioser to tri •Ulausur al area_. ii ic. MC ;table brat zonfiicu will, cris--ens den tc_s- taro incompatible iand uses. G%niie tiff: proDdsec 4f-roc. ianascauinc strip or, tilt nortr. end o_ the Dropostd uroicc: mII;, -omvic^ SOM": �11__ not+ntn._ ir, int rczarr• Indy ti `_ In-reared DO:."ni131 �ais 1f12` f C' U-aIll_. cUIlill-t nous`. comt3imnt_, and COMB aims aeain5i odor,• and rume5 nay bccn SLIIIIcleriti 3dQrCS_',cC. zfl "t" Indus iai an resictnuP-: uses a%: ::ellriy maampaub - ane snollic no! C� SfICCIlO,T.�_ tCrCir c. V'Iti'7l]L'i SuIIl ,eri 'DuT:Cr. C" Initi°at10r . T" r D .__..��','_...,-'.petite._.. I 1 f 9G•;.��. Cctgtuisin:s, im;Ja:t f�?.r � amires Yt:c ''e;.-posure D! person. too, o- t=eneraton G IIoiS� iev,ls ir. e;:cns: o naar :sEaoiishery jr, thE, local ue =ml Ptat• o- noise. ordinance o- applirabit standards of other aaen:ie:.' Tnc OND cites a study by Cha•}e= M,- Rai= € associates. Which lists �y:iStinr nOiS� t�'el5 gi Lile DTDr'.,c i SILK raging fTo1r approximates i; s- to 76 DN...I) Tr.-- NND srat_s tilat' rurur�- nose ievei; ai outdoor- Use spaces adiacent to kiohmond Parkway ar: anticinamd to ma-e frog. 74 -zo 77 D*.W Altair, thee: is no srzzeinc mention of tht potential noise impacts 0:Ah-- M4 CC raciiin. Particularly, there is no mention or tirefact that the INLACC facihry OD a;=s during the nighttime hou-. No= lavels associated during these niQhtzime operations h eve not b=.n studied of accounted for, but in cen:.ral t-- Wierar._e for no's: ins sio_ntial area is severoi�, diminished at night. Nocrumal operations at the IMACC site znay include additional trucks entering and exiting tre sit-- via tnr Richmond Pari:way aLnd Pittsburg Avenue, and noise associated with the ioading and unioading of churns at tires facii' in addition. the production lines themseives creat-- som-- noisy a'. night. IMAC Is nocturna; oneratiam nava been in effect for years with vers httit compiaiM. V>rnik e IvEtigation h.;rasuran e XLa. 1 d ^ am positive mitisations, polential buyer should aisc' sign a deed diselosurc statement acimowitdging tnc-potenlial fot noise impacts bath dutilig tr-- dar and mahnime hour. These iMT)Bzts should b:-- monnoree and studied speciricaD), as ulen, pertain to those noises Eenerated b1, the IMACC facihTv and (nose truc'ic: tha: servi= til- IWJACC fnciiin, In any even:. furth—., stuo� is needed before tine Cottnr; --an deter 1112 that. the noise impacts arc less than siQAifican'.. F._ ImDa:tYV. Trausnormfion/irnfric. !nz NfND not-- that tr: sb , studied inLrs=blior suIT-Gundinr 6-: hrotrost:d Oro=Z[ wouiei aL operate musia-ztomy um_n trif nroicci trafll: is added to ti:e "future basziine traffic voium_E." It do--_, howm,z., note tna tn_ Ricnrnonu Pari;way rIitnburc, Avenve inrer=lion 1Vi!1 or--ratc a' ieve] 01 services "� _ dn-ira botr, the c.rn.ip.rn, pease commute hour in the vcat 2020. This mean that tca inlerseciior: would bec operating at DN,::T 100'/r, o; IL, CabaziT- , causinC s1zIltIIeaai d eiav- of mE. trit�rSe:tiori. �JRIit the IIi?�'� DropbS_ miLication rn=asu7� LG Re11'1 M.E. tt Situation. Lhcrt 1-7 no rnitiQfltion mcpsu= io adcn!ss th-- ftz-, thai.ths lndum—,', tram: alon, �iiSULuc 4 t'CLlll� ons LITE i.1C11710r1C' Lali: ' ..,cats_ u po::mai ' fc.- Conf1;=,P,ltii =Pr: arld 5'r1'$ a-sozialtu with res16:ntia! LSC"s. Sloe-movinP trli:_: ,7,'i11 Lr t or, l; daily basis, addin° sit_,...''iinzanuy to vm.,=T -,msLrauoCl. Till: br[)bl:rfi i 1ti'p1CCi .f)vu Paee "'._L'k�1✓,'���,'*.1•iea2s L� U 19Do.dcc KOC � I4'tu'1� �l�Tr?S iia; em�nr ?L!, NDU ray_ r' Nvntr�1vc* L,csid nua! =L =a%n mous i a i u�__: :T,CrO4CP; ur::OT. z£.Ci; Oth�.. :Orli is L. a,L L mininnumn. 'was,-rams acdiuon::. ZCU6'1 Canniugior I: should bt notee that I),/LkCC. Comoration aces no,, oppose the re:;Id:niis] rroieci ncr st: I~irnT f!V__7, ii i� el=ar tha', ti:_ arca surrounains th_ IMACC izziiitl i:, an ar—_c in. r amnion. V': ur= tiit County tD bt mindful UI the not`-tial to scuczz-`' ti:C Industrial Usts DII OT th!! a-,-.a w1b, z:TICT'00oilin` r-slantial C'nvciorymcnt. INIAC'_- has been 2 gim' and nronuctty: nnQ. bol In the Nord) R. chmond area IO1- OVA to promote e cevelonm_-m natirrrl in the area tll i emhasizes growth but alk)iAr- tht existing industrial busir._sses in the area to continue to fiourisi-t. Wt iool: fotv=d to wori;in_2 VIviti:, the.Counn to achidvina this FmL Thani, you foi VOU7 nnniior to this matter. 5`incerei�', Lin 7. L,,,son- J aiu,. "W. _-n I;1/i�.�CC. Cc-peratior Nove Project Responses to CDmmenrs Letter A: OPF The commentor orovicies transmittal information for the project. No resDonSe is required. Letter B: Caltrans The commentor requests copies of the Dowiing Associates' traffic report. The County provided Caltrans with these r reports in early December, 2000. E Letter C: CDFG (1 j The commentor requests an environmental filing f ee. Thi: comment does not address the adeauacy of the 10 environmental document and no response is rea.0 i red. (2) Commentor suggests that a Streambed Alteration i., Agreement (SAA) may be required. As described on papa 14 22-23 of the Initial Study, no grading or activity is 15 anticipated within the streambed and this has bee n verified 1c by the Project Sponsor's biologists: however, this comment will be included in the administrative record provided to the �e decision-makers. 1L 2(i Letter D: BBRPD (1 ) & (2) 2 The commentor requests the inclusion of additional mitigation measures that require the Project Sport sof- to 2s provide funding or an in-kind contribution toward the Wildcat Creek; Trail over-crossing. As noted on Daae 54 d the Initial Studv, the project proposes two acres of open 27 Space and recreation onsite and will be reouired to elthei 2E Increase this to three acres or provide an Irl-lieu l ee. This 2� acreage will meet the Count\/ s standard f0;" parks and recreation requirements. The Wildcat Creek Trail is an existing trail that is described bV TRAC (Comment G) as underuiiiized. This under underutiiization is attributed to biockaae of the trail at the Richmond Parkway underpass - an existing condition. 3% Currently use of this trail requires a One-half mile detour ic- e Oe sionahzed crossing at Pittsburg Avenue. That is sE. unrelated to the number of DeODle who will use the trail or 3L anv other asDect Of the proleci S implementation. Th_ 4r' existing situation Is not an impact Of this Droject and will not be exacerbated b\1 the DroieOt. While the residents of this Tuiure project may wish to UTIIi7e the trail. the additional Users can not be considered as either" contributlno a significant for cumulative) Impact las the trail is underutilized). However. in spite of the Tact that there will 4i be no significant documented impact as alleoed by the r L. Nove Responses m r_ommenj�. i2; 7i2GG6 Nove Pro iect kesoonses ro Commenrs =acL .'c: 1C commento . the Proiect Soonsor has effected to wort; with _ the =BRPD and TRAC in their efforts to improve the undercrossing. Making this condition of approval a mitigation measure is not reauired under C=QA• as there has been no analysis, or substantial evidence provided to r indicate that the Proposed Project will have a sianificani affect on the environment. e, U 7o Letter E-: EBMUD (1), (2), (3) .2 The commentor requests that the Project Sponsors contact 7 EBMUD during finalization of the FFinal Plan. This comment 14 addresses the merits of the project rather than the analyses 1s in the Initial Study or the adequacy of that analysis. This 16 comment will be included in the record before the decision- making body. ie i� Letter F: Richmond 20 Sanitary Commentor requests to be included in the design review -l•, process. This Comment addresses the merits of the project rather than the analyses in the Initial Stud} or the adequacy of that analysis. This comment will be included in the 2= record before the decision-making body. 26 Letter G: TRAC (1) The commentor requests an analysis of the project s 2e. .potential aesthetic impact on the trail users. The aesthete,: °Ci1mDaCtS will be beneficial to nature. given the industrial K nature of the site. The initial Study, on oaQe 8. identities Y that: "Given the site is currentiv in a bhohted industrial- agricultural use area, there is tittle likelihood that the Proposed GrUiect Would have & slonificani adverse impaci 34 on the phvsica/ environment with respect to aesthetic impacts. 3, The Initial Stud\/ goes on to sav that "Aionc Wildcat - C ree p athe fands;apinq will screen the rasideniia( evo!o man . 3ECui-de-sacs will include connecilons for ac--e--S t0 the creep 4C area. Mitication Measure i.C.: The P rOiect SpollSoi' shall dBvelOr.) a detailed r andsca.De Plait that is-aCCeptable to the Ciiil o• 44 Richmonc ane( Contra Costa County ane' designaTeC1 10. 45 screen the proposed noisy carrier. 4E_ Ncwc R=_sponse;io Comment. Nove Proiect ReSpDnses to CORlmenrs The Contra Costa County Lesion Reviev:, process will = ensure that the proiect s final landscape pians prD vide screening of the project from the trail. additionally. there are gg trees that border the Proiect site located bz,�tweenion the propertv line and the trail. These trees will rernain and additional veoetative screening will be added. =Fig ure =' Oi the Initial Study provides a Preliminary Landscape? Pian that F. identities extensive tree and shrub planting. Cou'pled with 4 the existing trees, views onto the site will be. aimo st �o blocked. The Count/ is the lead agency and responsible to r i3 reviewing landscape plans. The City of Richmond is being given the opportunity to comment on the project's 7, landscape pians along Richmond Parkway, as the iE, landscape corridor along Richmond Parkway will be 17 developed within the City of Richmond maintained rich;-o1- i& way. 14 2( (2) Commentor notes that "page SS of the IS/MND sh ould be 21 updated to recognize that: 22 2 1. the Wildcat Creek Regional Trail underpass or" the 2141 Richmond Parkway now is impassable vear-round due to 2` accumulated mud and water, rather than seasona /Iv blocked 2E, (last paragraph of pane 55): and, 2E 2. Republic Services has completed the Phase landfill 2S, _ Say Trail and will compiete the enure three-miie landfill ioorr 30 during 2001 (first paragraph oT page S5). See att domed current Richmond Say Trail Map. These updates are advisory in nature and neither materialiv_ affect the baseline conditions nor the affect the potential impacts of the proposed project as assessed in the I nitlai 3r Study. The commentor's suggestions are appreci aced and these suggestions are herein made pari of the, reword thal 3F. will be submitted to the decision-making body. aC (3) Commentor asserts the Proiect wouid create an u roem 'need for new or phvsicali altered oovernmenta ;aCllltl8c. 42 rather than waiting for a child or adult to be killed or Inlure 42while crossing the Parkway. 4li Is unclear tO what the commenter is referring. E)edtlor 46 XIII of the Initial Studv reiers tO Dhvsical impacts associated L Nove R.esoonses 10 Comments 12/27(2006 Nove Froiect ReSPDnses to Commenrs I, with the provision of new or phvsicall\/ altered oovernmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. the construction of which would cause slonITICant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for anv of the public services. The project proposes construction of on-site Gar[; area that meets the E' County's requirements andior the pavment of fees. as allowed by County ordinance. All of the projects 70 construction-related impacts and indirect imoacts are addressed in the initial Study. The commentor provides no substantial evidence that this project would overburden the trail system. As is stated in the commentor's letter, ,4 "Currently. very few peopie use the Wildcat Regional Trail i, east of the Parkway because it is nol accessible from if. �BRPD s staging area, and there are no residents along the trail. 1F iL The K-B homes nroiect is adiacent to the south site of this 20 trail and the trail is accessible to this development. The trail can be accessed from other properties alono the trail (see Figure 3) including Verde =iementary School. While some of these potential users rnav have To wall: a few 1 blocks to access the trail, that distance is no greater than the distance the residents in the northwest portion of the 2C- Nove project would have to walk, tc, access the trail. 2r; It is not unreasonable for peopie who are on a trail 2P (hvpotheilcaliy for the purpose of exerc!se) to have to 3C detour for 2 - blocks to cross at a s!onalized intersection and return to the trail in order to resume their hiking experience. The assumption that users would unsaiely cross Richmond Parkway/ is speculative and unreasonable. as a safe crossing is provided at a nearby signalized Intersection. Furthermore, it is not an impact of the pro!ect. �! but an existing condition associated with an existing trail. s (4) See reSDonse to comment G 131 above with respect to the Proposed Proiect Detno inconsisien witri '� ouniv DDHcies 4( related to alternative tr anSDortatlon. the commentor disagrees with the anaivs!S in the initial Studv. The commentor does not Drovlde an substantial evidence to support their concerns. However. this comment will be �= Included in the record before the decision-making body. The lnitia! Stuov on pale 61 (impact )'V d . discusses the Ivnvc-_ .Pesonnse_to Commeni, ',2;'I_7/200,' Nove Proiect Responses ro 'ommenrs 10 project's potential impacts and identifies no impart" (e);cept for a beneficial impact). (5) Commentor contends "the orofecl wouid require tt--2e construction or expansion Of recreational facilities i.e.. the proposed Wildcat Creek Reaionairail overpass o;" the Richmond Parkway." See response to (3). The E, commentor disagrees with the analysis contained in the Initial Studv. However. the commentor does not D rovide 10 any substantial evidence to support their concerns. This 11 comment will be included in the record before the decision- making body. 7� 14 (6) Commentor contends "the project would have environmental 1� effects which will cause significant adverse effects on 7C human beincs. " 1 J 7e See response to G (31. The commentor disagrees with the 19 analysis contained in the Initial Study: however. the 20 commentor does not provide any substantial evidence to 2, support their concerns. The Initial Study analvzes all of the 22 factors (noise, odors, hazardous materials. truck t raffic. etc.) that may cause adverse impacts and concludes that 24 there will be no significant impacts atter implementation of mitigation measures. This comment will be includ ed in the 2C, record before the decision-making body. 2e. (7) Commentor request mitigations that require the G roiect 2E Sponsors participate in funding the Wildcat Creek Reciona! 3C' Trail overcrossing, See response to G (3) above. The Initial Study analvzed potential impacts to recreational uses and determined that the potential impacts would n of rise ib the level of significance. Simply Increasing, the use Of a .jy facility. such as a trail. does not rise to the level of significance, (especially a trail that is.. as was stat ed by 3E, commentor. underutilized). Furthermore. the corn mentor 3% does not provide any substantial evidence to support their 38 concern. The trail will be able to accommodate the 3� Increased u'ser�_-: as such users are dispersed ove r time. 4C There are many communities of greater densities that snare 4 Trail use with no significant impact to these traii S. Absen; a 42 finding for a significant Impact, no mitigation measures are 4' warranted. However, in the interests O'i belno a C] OUd neicinbor.. the Project Sponsor has Indicated their 4 wllkngneEs To.assist the appropriate, agencies heiping 4E toward the remedvino of the existlno conaltlonS. _'.`.�'JDVE t1E5DDn5�5 TU:,omment_. -12,27,200-. Nove Project Responses to Comments Daae 6 of 10 (8) All proposed and foreseeable projects were included in the cumulative analysis of all impacts. Furthermore. all of the project's impacts carp be reduced to a level of less than 4 significant with mitigation: Therefore the proiect will not have a cumulatively considerable contribution. In the case 6 of recreational facilities, the cumulative project's scenario has a beneficial impact, as noted in discussion G (3), G (4) E and G (7) above. The commenter disagrees with the y analysis contained in the Initial Study, however, the 10 commentor does not provide any substantial evidence to Il support their concerns. This comment will be included in 12 the record before the decision-making body. 13 14 Letter H: Gagen McCoy 15 (1) The commentor alleges that the initial Study did not 16 specifically identify IMACC uses as a potentially incompatible use. During preparation of the initia I Study 16 the IMACC uses were considered along with the other 19 _ industrial operators within the area. The noise consultants 2C' placed their monitoring equipment at the northeasterly 2'1 corner of the site (across from both the IMACC and 2integrated Resources Recovery facilities). During the 21-1 numerous site visits by members of the Initial Study team. 2u no odors or excessive noise were observed. `c 26 Traffic engineers and air quality specialists noted all of the industrial uses. ricure 3 identifies all of the surrounding 2e uses, including the IMACC facility. 2!' ,0 The commentor goes on to say. "The Miiiaated Necaiive 31) Declaration (MND) does not specifi;,aliy address the a_' potential negative effects of IMACC s er,isiinc adjacent industrial use on the future residents of the propUsed z proiects. For this reason, we respectfully request that an E/P be required to study further the potential impacts of file 36 proposed development. ' 3E Although cenerahy, the purpose of CECA is not to evaluate 3U an existing uses impacts on a proposed use. rather to 4r) assess the impacts of the project. However: in light of the 4- fact that this Proposed Proiect may introduce a population 4� into an area where there are industrial uses (and"therefore noise. odor. hazardouss materials. air pollutants, truer 1. traffic; etc.). the anaivses aid account for the existinc 4 conditions. The analvsis in the initial Study identified 46 mitigation measures.that would serve tO `Drotect' the new Nova: Fsesoon=e;to Gommenis 12;27/2006 Nove Pro iect Responses to Comments population. Sound walls; buffer areas with heavy landscaping. setbacks and specialized windows vv, ere identified as mitigation measures. Performance c riteria for noise mitigation and disclosure statements for odors were also provided in the Initial study. ,See discussion in the Initial Study on paces 7-6 (buftering and iandscaP ingi, paces 10-20 (air pollutants and odors), and pace] tip,-48. F (noise). Mitigation measures would reduce the pz�,tential impacts of the project and the potential exposure of persons �0 to noise and odors to less than significant levels. Absent a finding of a significant impact it is unclear what benefit the preparation of an EIR would add to the analysis. 14 (2) Commentor contends that an EIR must be prepared when a IE) project has a cumulatively considerable contribution to ah 16 environmental effect. Commentor eoes on to disc uss expert It 7 opinion and fair argument. Commentor siates tha t the 18 facility ''may occasionally. albeit infrequently. emit odors 19 that are objectionable to homeowners. ' Commentor states 20 that the project should be buffered from the indus-trial Ili facilities as called for in the North Richmond 2< Redevelopment Study (Redevelopment Study). 2" 24 First, all of the project's potential impacts have been reduced to levels of less than sidnificant and therefore there 26 is no cumulatively considerable contribution by the Proposed Project. Commentor does not specify What the 2e cumulative impacts might be. nor do they specify to which 2L significant adverse impacts the Proiect micht cont ribute. 3 ,71 With respect to providing expert opinion. commen tot" does not identify any expert who provided analysis in their letter to the County. Commentor is an attornev represe nting IMACC., and is commenting on the etiect o, emiss ions. air _ J quality policy and risk of fire. Commentor references several air resource policl-�--s reiatino 3 , to buffering around sources of air pollution. The I nitial 3° Study, on paces 1, 11-11-2. discu'sse those p0iiG!es -and other' 40 reiated policies. The commentor is incorrect in that there is n0 Dufierino between the WA'CO' fa lilt\' and the 2�roposeG 4_ Project. There is approximately 335 feet between the closest sensitive receptor (the proposed uniiE, cicsesl to a Pittsburg Avenue in Building 2) and IMACC s reconditioning facilityi. These cons!si of a 10' backyard plu-s :C;' !egetated 4e buffer%sound wall plus 75 of Pittsburg Avenin ria ht-of-wa;l _'.Ivove • Responses to Comment,. I 1;2,,20G5 Nave PrOieC2 ResQonses IO Commenrs -ao 8e 10 plus 200_ reef rrom the property line is the recon diiionino facility (on IMACC s property). (See Sheets D f rom Source 6a: of the Initial Study: and ioure With respect to the Redevelopment Study and the reference r to "Land Use Designations/Entitlement Process." the text noted by commentor is a description of the existing e conditions and current designations (as noted on page 15 of that document), not a statement of proposed land use. This 10 study has no bearing on potential future land uses as it is a marketing document, not a land use document. And as 12 such, there is only a cursory discussion of future land use 15 policy consideration for Area C (wherein the Proposed 14 Project is located). Only the "Maintain 1=xisting u eneral 1�. Plan Scenario" (akin to a no project scenario) of the 1E, Redevelopment Study precludes the option for residential development within Area C. The reference to retail and it 1e. servino as a buffer between residential and existing 1� industrial uses is speculative on the commentoi s part as 20 the text of the study only says that significant properties may" consider retail and does not provide anv reference to its location or that the retail would serve as a buff of 7.. ?= (3) Facilities that emit or transport hazardous material are governed by numerous oversight agencies. In the case of 2C. IMACC, they have.a federally enforceable permit filed with the SPA by the BAAOMD. They have numerous ( i 2t: sources permitted through BAAOMD that include furnaces. 2S• drye! spray booth-s. boilers. miscellaneous cieanino 3(• operations that emit PM, etc. The BAAOMD has provided the inventory and history of complaints or incidences (discussion below). This plant is classified as a Svntneiic I\/iinor -acuity under District Regulations 2. Rule o. IViaior Facility Revievr: -and 3, these ensure that li is not subject to the permitiino redulrements o-1 Title VOf the -ederali\ Clean AI:' Act as se. amended in 1990. and 40 C=R Pari 70. Thioperating t. permit covers all sources emsiinq at the faciiity as of permii 4c issuance. The permitiinc and periodic inspecfior, of the facii itv is ,_ designed to ensure that IMACC is processino in accordance -- TC trlell" permii anc lnai ti?n'•,' are campi ant with tnc 4 reoulatory requirements. 4E Novi ;:',esoo11se3 m Comment. Nove Proiect PesDOnses ro Commenrs ='2c- C,0; Jr. A public records request from the BAAOfVD result ed in a report history from January I , 2000 to December -10. 200-. A total of 47 "comoiaints' were noted. Those "comDlaints" are the result of inspections by the BAAQMD insp actors. All of the complaints were resolved and only one violation is r, noted. E The Compliance Record indicates that IMACC doe?s operate within their required parameters that the processing 1Ci equipment is working as designed. 11 12 The Initial Study includes, as a mitigation for odor s, a disclosure document associated with the deeds or rental 14 agreements. The specifics of this disclosure shall be 1-` consistent with past County practices. 16 17 If, at the time that disclosures are made. IMACC is 1E; operating, it will be covered by this disclosure. 1U 20 (4) The Initial Study did assess the potential for the p roposed 21 - project to transport, use. dispose or release hazardous 22 wastes and no impact was identified (page 32 of t he initial 2:; Study). There is no mandate under the C=C)A Gui idelines to 2 address the increase in accidents from an existing use. 2F� The risks associated with transport are far oreater for -77 truckers traveling on congested roadways at hion speeds 2" (e.Q.. the interstates) than they are at the veru iovv speeds "' the\ are traveling on Pittsburg Avenue. Such an accident. 3r' that would result in a release Of toxic materials would have 'DI .. to of considerable magnitude (and therefore speed) tc, result in a release. Moreover. should an accident occur 3-- tranSDorters Of hazardous waste are required by the State to have plans in place to respond to any releases _ In order to ensure that no adverse impacts result. 3E- 717 Additionally. the section of Pittsburo Avenue adjacent to the 3P• PrODOSed PrOiect will be improved and pavement widened. 3� street lighting installed and denerali\, will result in bette! 4'1 visibility and therefore improved safety (over the ex.istinc conditional. 15) The commentor disacrees with the analvsi-s contained in the initial Study. However. the commentor does not provide 4` any substantial evidence to Support their concert;S. This INOVE Pesoonses to;.ommenu 12!277200 Nove Proie::t Responses ro Commenrs aa: 10c 9(, comment will be included in the record before the decision- making body. Also see response to Comment H (2). (6) Acoustical/=nvironmental measurements included a monitor located in the northeast corner of the site, approximately 80 feet south of the Pittsburg Avenue centerline and across the roadway from IMACC. This monitor continuaiiy looped statistical sound level data over a. 27-hour period (on 9/20 - s 21/04). Noise levels were generated by a variety of 70 environmental sources including vehicles on the adjacent 1, roadways, operational noise from adjacent businesses. etc. The environmental noise study report includes mitigation i measures intended to reduce interior and exterior noise levels to County and State standards; based on measured data. 1 It is important to note that complying with applicable 1E, standards does not imply that noise levels from adiacent 7o businesses will be inaudible, nor does it limit the potential 2c, for noise complaints. However, the County believes that future residents should be made aware that the site is surrounded by industrial uses and they may occasionaliv -. hear sounds from these businesses. This additional 2 mitigation has been added to the MIVIRP. a_. (7) Commentor is correct that the intersection !s orojected to operate at Service Level F in the cumulative 2020 near 2F scenario. However, two alternative mitigations are prov!ged. either of which will improve the intersection �. operation to an acceptable level of service (Level D a County standards. As this proiect will pay its fair sharp of the cost of improvements. the Proposed Project s cumuiative impact is reduced to iess than significant leve!S. H The concern thak mixing truck. traffic and residential iraff!c will add to driver frustration is unsupported and not a sipniiicance criteria under C:EDA. However; the Initial s Study does icientiiv measures to Improve site access. 3� Including the provisions for westbound storage lanes on qr Pittsburg. Avenue and Richmond Parkway all of which will reduce conflicts and deiay. _ (8) This comment addresses the merits of the project rather - than the analvsis in the initial Study or the adeyuacv of that analvsi . This comment will be included in the record ti= before the decision-makino body. iv0v FI ESD0n.se_•I omments _._7,230G:. -..EXttlBIT. 9- a� c c, ul 4 p + to C _ t OLn tO d d O D O p o D 0 •► C> P CG U fl O ✓ CD NN O G V ar CO if, D N G @ N cA oNdr ° ti .- •� � yDU�Dm v• 1 p t4 3- � UN4 ti fl N � v 1 O Q 4�xn D r O m C) r Ari D t5� D .v = Cr, D D V I 'r N G R, V ¢" fl UI t� .. N T ,'t. U ° m G D Y. V D•N O y ,li O ,t} tn > E1° D . > ca a� o.N "�, a c o ° ' ,' N _ r d ► Q Q uy„,U G O 1 ,. D s fl v: V' 01" 0 ti Y� n oa crJ D = T u, m in o m m �m ° o � � � N ti T tr., °. _ ✓ @ Q Q ° C) CD CO o a u. U �f to a ca O ;, w Dir.. o tIAItti m e Q r f v v N c _ u ' c - 61• CJ .G U ,N e+y.,k'r. �, r-J r o G �, 7 O .j 7 :. OY`ti;.N r 4• tr. {L C r O N4; O, G � m a • ...5 tv ¢r tP k. 01 W a' N t C tr) Z a r � a NW � o �' kµ` DC.i-•y V ° _Tt _ N r 1 r N r {yt r V C T U (, - t4 ;. `. V tI 7 61 �'Y� .-. " r 'N {_' p, ..- N ✓" r r- -r + •G D u, c, c• u. R�IU. t R v a _ � �• y. .'-- � - `= v: c m m e > I t c•N c i '� U � a c -�'U p •- n > clsc4 n Ii Y � 4 of 1 � f G` T Er, - - @ th n� d, T U, In V; O 7 .5= II, U �. tJ Zi - Y. V, O p,— CC: C r. m a Y c c r a u> > N C.!v _ O G. �•6 ,�6J. 'C .p.. v � •'" -` 6: ?` O ;� V "' � � Ql: V p C' U) •- ... tC U T Oi of; h U, t6 C1, O U ur EnvOO In V• O. O �, G C' •v d. ?. r O L MIS O r r U, U W U, _ C' N d a' D Ur. CAI Li > v Q, V, d.:] •.. G7 :� •y >L. '�. •G G = = {!; a•, - tti' L7 J L3, U G' z c o ` r? G) w L p 0) v;'ate L G o � V C> SIIII 1'0 r- k t ' O` fU •° I 0 I ` in a; tU C) a 1 O v; — —' U' X.x O ED v = N v j a> p„ :.� r G 4; .� a) v) O :E J R _ N En �_ O a)! C' X a) In Cl) G N O Q N .. a) ai. G T ICJ i •N .- v) w ,.- a1 ai ✓ ` �I =� - _ a� � � •o � .. � _ as ti N 0 m b :. � 3 � �m � �•� �; � � —� _ 'G .v O u) O N v) ,,•.- "` a: O a7 `. CL) C, CD cl) a> O V) D at c _ O u) y — _ o, cr F to � u a v >, Lr, ° G: _ G v o r a` I C O @ a 4 C p m1 ,. Lt S ! O N ,1 G — w o U, ti > O O p) N f ,!a) x� U, — _ O G tf) LLStn N U a rJ = D t i C, c v U LC !I '1 @ - �, > G tT .=V G v . 6 G Z = .r. G r, _ D N w R O !, G@ C Vn 1 C'. G _ _ ^Q} a� y No U N tt W = - O v > v@ C J@ G N U+ L Cl) V.` N I{ a) N G G '- " O U,O ! pj It @ U•v C 'J-�„ - r @ R O 7'.•- a @ ^DD @ N G g '1 G N O '= u, C N .0 4 II: din: OJ - y y G O v, u, 3 0, 'i St D U N G t7 D = O f •'� O O d r N O G@ C _ O G , O co 'D T7 u> N C O: @ C Y G! G u, v: _? ff? :>. G' DU r� v. a '! L` C) trl4? v, -� C G { O 1 C, C V U G Y: _ ,_ U, D 7 U: Y. > U 't'"_ O ..- r G @ :C C' Gi L, C t5i G m I II!?j Q� i� m �cmi ' L v 1 i M > i JI I d Is , m Q P-.. l34.y.y- I • I p; P ylIU {;t+l LT.- Or v s3 N N O �•> colMigil O O N {*:��,�= > >• U ID I IS — a 1 a Ro I I rl£* O C Cr: N � ` O N � -' � G -p' N O � v ti, Q' u`• = •�; � >,�j pa's a w _ o a m c = �_' ap J (D NED:CD Q' "si'>I N — cG T� O N — '— O ° O N ([ G � � .� @ � R` — � G •vi —_ — Qi — G — t./) r. — — o m, .i?m o •�� U = ^ v.• = m L _ v' m u '= G � _ o — G .� -. a� ` < r."� G m l = co m- m U) 3 � °,_ � m R• •p = - nU �• v,! o ° w c , c G - - - _ ^ o - m o, lul r _ Cl) __ _ - e G _ ° m CD - Cr ° _ _ ° r - a a om U ` CD = O =D > > _ '�CG ' erlrl CZ m o '' v G T U v, CD J > = O c c o, 0 J r� r--may-- L O' fl, t Ln ` Ick 7 , � �,• _ LS Otn G C otoiG I .'@ Q• O U, O N 1 N p O C.> p e N N t= � Y , tn ,z C. 1 N sa o tD =S � {{N N It CS•`LU (� '> N tc E o k V .:, '? C', V; R, N tL O r W G� :.� •� N '— : N cn: N ti GO O N 6 G�O = U � N V 7 O �. 'O 1?• rU '> V, �,4r j d 'G CS'•�� it N G al v N N F o is m o v, v : 7 c - v N a. c N •o p u — v, Q _ to G c — i `all '—u LI) Lr ct v U Cu a U3 n G V, - N In o �, C I•C) :I O zi 1� > Y Im o _ =:J o — = IL ` LLL ti D L I V) O U1 0 — C c U C > mi IUUUO �.mUC� L) L) H Y �5fx Q) caa o > c tT U - I i19CDpa�� m = U ° � .mamaoco _ mpp I o — C a) :..I = r = D a, O A U v, ;� A Cl > 7 m u U� ff1 — r C, m T c CD v; v, p -- D m >, o O N U I I c En a _ ILC = U v, = = Ucl) m p- . I i '��';�L C C CJ Q m v, - a _ N! 10) 7 O co C C [J)Cn 3 _ _ D 1 u - vi .- a) a) _. o > - v _ ° Ct, V) ._ ` O a) W j a) >, rn Cf (ll N - v; a) - = m _ = — ° v —_ � u,o a; ` • D -- Ci p G M a) ` C h�""I D U .p >' p — a) — G a) D > N � ?• N — w = : Y�,—Z) a m v, a— = V G = a• — N C m C = D Q) U 'p o 1 Q) v U Y m a) a� ` C� m C D L J >' m Q O a) { Q, m D .a m B: 7 D C a) = a) I U >.2 '3 V Q:_ ca — v L p v. L a U .1 Q) 'N >` a) Q) O a) .� L N ICD > - - m m GD x > _ -' o ° D co c G v; o m m — m co a, a o cc Er. •. o. o r c r m c o a' lN{o= ° - - - r- m Yui na a — -v; • 7 Y = L ° a m ° r o m• Ui m a) co a ° a U a vlcr _ G L _ p a Qi D ED v) Q) 1r r. v C' a G' .. r CG. GLI m — C a: Q, O G) Q) :J .G > — 3 CT.—.I: :.1 Z O C'. E. G O v, r G) L r' p a) r1 a'Q),=7= r G C. G U) G) G m v, W d _ ¢ m CU = ._ _ v ;> _ _ _ i44 v z D v m O; !� > tu f0 r p m E o � ~c I c �ai to cL i m O O. r D r r_ Q) v U N - U C c 03 o a = I ;MM I � �i�r.t3tJQ mUtJU � D CD C @ r r' @ v a { a C ..—. �ON "� = Gfllv@ �@C � EC > C N 0v1 O 2 [D @_ U tf; � U-1 = � O2 LD _, i c a m Ce y ca U CD c7 co -0 }= tJ GaL)Z2 ormG youa �' 000; >C) ID @oa> � c; a' o >_ L) D cc @-v, _ .� '� G r ,�, R G r_ a)! CD CZ o - _ v R u7 C = = > a = cc > o a v, 4 v O ti •c o �_ C0 j a N, . o" oU @ = - � - w aoaaa � " r, @ m is - U @ y c y 1^Q G it, as a = v. - U! c`v ID - ^ v, w = az t_ o o a> a > G, _ @ cn ro .� � 0'� va� mTL) o3 ^ Q@ "a, m = @ - - a n' CZ C-L m' m m = @_ - @ o �_ e a o 'a _ 4 ea v ti C GY G O _ U) C U a7 OJ G O G .N C , @ JO r t' Q •y v` CJ `y = G = - �' a! V GT °�� '— ... D '` a: 'S L C' p a; a; R. v, m � C a '' "v - " a> ( a v r a � = d Lr„ = � zOU); a; f - > - v ._ V. 4 _ - v� = =r v, I G ra ^ a) @ Ci Gi Da _@ C; 61 a: a a r H a: — v 51 N a, i IL m 0 L- I i i I � a O U� I ° v ai v> Q) f I N L> N tom @ .i Lt d a@ O ,p C »ja LLLi '> o m a > G C a ai — N C, G C f �I G vi @ - .� @ O N > I r) 3 m f ) � < G L ( @ C@ C a> r � pCa - u I O OI >, Q. i _ @ Ci, 01 @ _, .r 8;.. > G •CD (fi V f to C - - — 'r @ - as > o v v, o, — a: o - a NIC - 6 N - R, VN 3 .- - C 1- - ..... tv > v, h 4> �� n I Ca U — C3 a a v R. m G, ~ i, @ j c CL) m > o m _ o a) a+ c, v c� � ' U w G 3 � Qv° o oT a> = � �I n` @ G O @ - G >,Ql v U, N 'C D cm @ R' V) a) O O r r V L"+i@@ O q 2• a a a G v, C 'r a — Z: u) to M — tea I I 'o n in U, - E o i ro F a - a1 G 4 ..1 G tr N G. mcg — p -, o Q I I I - • ! coYl I N' ! o H i N o U Co N d� - a,O I � I ! I t � y N oll 1 I I ! I i I i a, V, U, •D a, a. o < � . m r u - c' a• G> of LL U• O t^ 0>'D.G- E F ti p D D O Qi CC. �i cG N; u R. .- > a c c m r c a ° - o ° >v U o o v _ v; -CL, CL) _ - mI o _ rz N oimm ti ¢ � � m - o mr "C-L) _ tea a) C; L) C) , >. a' - a7 > cl) Ent° v d. < .- a > c m c ° _m r v, _o a _c �' r _' = _o. c - 0! m � = _ = U) = - U, - r o = - o _ r c = o o, u. a) 71' > w _. v, — v C6 v �- -- C. _ G c- C .: - N; L• 0 0 ' o ! m I _ • I U I > I i G I e CIO o u.•L v. J { ` G C O CD t u �' ' ✓ N ✓ a X1'1 U •_�."G v ro .0tio 00 c y LT O N d@ N U - m_v � m ✓ Q ��C1 �o NVQ ° ad c U ° JG ., v) °) v o U ro R ' ,\ O C ' t4'G T -^ ✓ O �' „J _.+ .�.- U -D C..) N i CJ U. � � n � �Dta`u N 7U v m . C4 �UO(1) m �"i 1 ° ✓Cl "•' p 6 N v � O � U C '-• �%' � CJ N a, .r fl? °-��Ti 1 ° m ooL)c � Upvv U� s g1 0� o ° vo va Lo trl 0.1 ,t .ro°' v o u `•� ',' m T vu,� o� � U, �,.� v C� u = :. 'r N � N+ o, CLa _ r" C'v.•`� v: i 1 Y' G UN O r•• N V+ .= p; N N O _ '•- tp O o -_'a a'U °. v o y _ M. a ti c, v v v �, - a ? u. v, : a.t nky ° @ ti (v a , i (J W ', r i E� ` C - C ?' •r N i �. r u,` - v '. •` � = rJ o �,d✓'1ro a s v. o` c v 1 u,m o e ° u 'v>V) N FJ - cr c o � �-'a of .� : 3 ,� R'v, � > � u; .a•c � a�, v �J -. N •. r� r ,cam v G N e• N J U O1 � tp d 7 , ; i tS p m ♦4 p d I �, G- @ �v a@ U o o a M, 9' yo ' zr o C 'I 1 G O O O t9 @ O o O 00 °6 Cl- o 7 ~ R il! CU ~ p 1 U �, o °' d a� U °=U o r ° = Q)C �@ o @ "' o o:... a- o >.a o•v @ ,.. © U = o C �, U m a� U ..., �, �,1 t:b m 'a �Gzc�j @ �o �--_�� � cc•,� u� o•Na� @@r•aN � oU � a@ - @ co U © 03 �,'G@ p000 nc � o o � uooC2 �d doro a = p � �� "•�= c J= °' 1c �-UN , 1 u U D `N a 2a 0 LD _ R5 ~ O ? V 1) G V> pi °i u � ti, ;, r, c• a c �� o a r„��, v � o Lf y'. ;y I u•, V) - = m a, m I O CI :I 7 'I M — y I `G V,; > m Cl c `5�d t° o C I O Ga T I 9�.3kli `C 07 6 @ CL Er) - m a M CD i u D -- u C7, co= v ma 1 D'p O 'C d G - G v UD Ln v, •O D' m U N N U N =3M! = C! v, v o o ✓ = m c cn = °' a: > .p J C) G _m a [p .= a, 6) G aj•? m �' [� a m p � 'Q m Z a G T = Q? N{ 1 m u c ` °_ ZL � mm = =_ UamaG - " _ ° =tip °; tvD CD tU �' :1 O [L G fu J to D = _ •n p '— U J� r a - a tr, 'I o = ° v, ' _� v a a = a N — J m a m m - a m - = - a m 3 .0 c _ c _ m m cc G ¢ - _ _ o > Gt cz to Dec II � a= u, � - 0) 1 I�M�l v n m p a m `G = _ V„ ._ n'I z _ - U - x _ A A u v, .v, lLY m a y p a - m ° _ a a ' Imo'' v, c a v a a - u G c> c� .�J O W •ti v o N wv Q to LD G m `t G+' �, t' Uf5''t. • �r� o p ; ••�c� � a a o• t \ Lo :- moo ; t �U �� o@ +n � � •, N a ' c ti o G �U J a O N •O D D G t\ pt 1r II', G u: U) n D a `Gv a> u O r, 4 o G 7 •v N 9 d 6=v W SG u tr, d w�O T II t G a c G N L)_ tics, Lr, N .rte- G G — O --. O C N O V% �_ O .- �:- t"r• U Q G'' .. N.,U p p y p C, O "- G, G.. t U U• dtt U G m -77 O'G, —O N 0> i U U' — G '�t tt> „ � . P ' cc � °= G ar-r ti �-.", u, �` � m 'a 'G a: �:•G m mo u: c a •� �. a, � ' 0.CU �� G N ✓�' G � u �� ,.- ..- t- p � 'uy N d'C, ', .- ". f � , O " N O N N C y.t4 G, CG G ci = io Q:,O 6 ✓ 7i Lr) i U 3 Lur G � a) Q; C. y U' Ir 2 +1 V G:• m D� CU i rT p N ru a � ' i f i I y i R , , � Y y� mj 1 �i a� `y c' qi C M,LO Q, CL L,,j w 'Er,_ _CJ N N L j r N G T N } ✓. 6s (U G U' CG C1i .0 fj' G CL O 4= r p N LL, r • L- N T U i'v u, r �=• p v py O M`L) = G ti „ z M o ro I 'O ti O ro J V! (fj G G ? i r' t tb t >- �j tP m'i m. - O k O N 6t i a I I j -Y. N_ I Fes- t 1 � { 4 ° ° r p pi C) 'G 4� Yui v d,r. ar ,c �; �,o � -c o', N o a��• ='� � °' - _ °� .= a - a �= a; N� co L) a c� = -G v, 6� •CJ ti p, ,1 O� �t,y� ._ d - - .� G' — p'1 r UJt CL N 2 1 0 m G. N t G R v U� 0 L O 7 \ N \ — + F G •t Y6 i0 D �� N Ur �+ ✓, •�; � v �' a,'=' moo 'r JSG N .fir � 'ry' d C i .� l,'s •;)', fr U, d O N tn 6 r—, _ ✓ ''\V O N G G C.) V' :� N ,\ '^ �.- c% O G tO N O i'O i Gr U' 6)✓ U CD N U 7•G- f•. �' V.• G'+J L. *..� �'. p . . �+r. G Q Vr —O � � — � U i � '�..e•^, "� r '' � —_ v i p V' T, C� Q? ± L � d " ' I O �� O Cwl tr) \ v,,• � — v L,� �- � u ✓ ' t ,,. G C ca � G G c• '�.;- crl >� v: c � .. v.% 'L O � � kt, v ✓ i�.. .T V , .G G J — \ U A• 1 - i I _ — cFyyi I Cy f5 Cil t O 'rU, U — eoN, ( o � � ° mV ° > c ! u i. U N U aJ Cl N r k',�C. o c I IL G o. C m o LL. C L fi� a. Mu oom i0m Ioaic i L) a> ai to ; cz zi Lr, - d ' o o ^o Io G � r i C) IC.3 (J < UC3 < I 1 i u — +,,�:. :tau: M.0 CD I v! I�ac Fb DU > .�`.. Ali Q: r C) .= m -VY I I � a' mI ° � � o ° � vG �Uu' � 1 M C..) < .... c:, E N m01 r — _. _ _ a } v - U ° U a p Q = v U d > < � a _ = 0 m >,'mml L) a ct m! N o u} o c� i L) c m r I tL = o C m. v v �. o C - v, o cr, - m — G — 7 ItA" cu a = a - Z I a - a o _ c - a G tn. _ WTI= _ � _ � r - f m C - a- C• c < C C< n L m _ _ u mul 7, n' ° • CLLi3 i:cncv = c V, L _ n a 0) v i'FZ C; a y o} _ - < C. SCIIY — > C:" v t C c mtXIX = L < ._ _ — — — G• — > - D q m m sl �N � lu o m m mf �I r .01 I� > n' I " I c > M• 3 o :�o a LL >CD En L m O O L 4'i:i M mou� i0 = m I �yi o 0 c N a) C> m �>K•i m �.— I �Eai Brio oo :<1 U U < 4. �I ` ALL a > •3 N o m c -1 m c o: o > v = - .. Cl) G 1Ll- OU v _ M m G _ = G e• R V, v, m Q p I _ G u _ G a' = m — V.. G — .m J .Im � = to U p , V) �zL - - cU _ mc �. � �D ; u' as c •o c u m - ' — - o v _ G IV U) - - fL L Q Q) v' — � — ItJ1!I ' j a c a m a, c m 1 L) _ — _ -Z _N o v, u 3 c M V, m' :I(!, = m > = a, O FZ m. z a; m Ill1J I c w a v _ i• �• < v - c U U cc. m W r = c cc = f o o _ .v' J �� `� �t 1 �' 1 } 1 �� +i �� e t� �k heaZ Estate Emnom¢t ttlPt_prtnl Economw Pub Z u Ftnancr, ian.d Use Poitt-. FINAL REPORT NORTH RicHmOND REDEVELOPMENT PROTECT AREA STUDY Prepared for. ,Contra Costa Coujml Redevelopment A-encu T'repared bV: Economic L Piannm-5vstems, Inc. In association with Be=man a Henigar rebruar, 2006 EPS 41401 EE RY,E'.E' Lik"umitr t,k P.A1.4EdG GEt•1V :501 Ninth St..Sunt 206 Piton• 510-84;-919'p Pnan, 91iH: Pnonc3G}-6_;-?5_- bcrkele-;.Cr. 4471(,-'_51 fay 510-94 1-92(1'1 'r a:: 910-G4S-20 r•ar C,�-5_:,-9 U4t. www.ens v s.ca ni TA.ELEE OF C0N7EN,TS I. INTRODUCTIONANDFINTDING ............................................................................ _....1 Summar, of rindinRs....... ... _....1 Report Organization............................................................................................ _..l? E. EXISTING LAND USE CONDITIONS........................................................................ _I'D Existing Land Use and Land Ownership........................................................... _..13 Land Use Designations/Entitlement Process..................................................... _..15 III. INDUSTRIAL MARKET OPPORTUNITIES................................................................._..19 PastPerformance................................................................................................. _..19 Projected Industrial Demand in the Market Area............................................._..19 Supply Pipeline and Net Demand in the Market Area....................................._..21 Competitive Advantages/Disadvantages.........................................................._..21 North Richmond Industrial Prospects..............................................................._..24 TV. RESIDENTIAL MARKET OPPOP.TUNITIES................................................................_... Residential Market Dverviev.............................................................................._..25 Recent and Proposed Projects................................................................................2S Residential Prospect=..........................................................................................._ 9 Affordable Housing Development....................................................................._..31 V. LAND USE POLI_Y CHANGES.............................................. Land Use Polio•Scenarios.................................................................................._.. Scenario Evaluation.............................................................................................._..3 INFP kSTRU=r,7_NEEDS A,, ALYSL........................................................................3� Cost estimate Sunman .........................................................................................H.. Development and Infrastructure Pnasing....................._....:..::.............:.:..............4C� inrrastructure Phasing and Costs..........................................................................41 inrrasrructure Maintenance Costs .........................................................................4f; :ST O TkBL�� �.NL rI�,UR�� Figure 1: North Richmond Area................................................................................... _...._ Figure 2: North Richmond Area by Subarea.................................:............................. .....5 Figure 3: North Richmond Parcels Part A................................................................... _..16 Figure 4: North Richmond Parcels Part B.................................................................... _..1: Table l: Development Potentia] by Scenario............................................................. .....6 Table 2: lnfrastructure Costs....................................................................................... _....S Table 3: Cost Burden by Area..................................................................................... _....9 Table 4: Cost Burden in Area C b`-Scenario.............................................................. _..11 Table 3: Trends in Emplovment Growth by Sector and by Area (2005-2030)......... _..20 Table 6: Projected Building Space and Land Demand in the West County_ MarketArea......................................................... .22 Table Major Development Projects in Supply Pipeline........................................ ...'?3 Table S. Projected industrial Demand in the North Richmond (2005-2036) ..........._..26 Table 9: Development Potentia]by Scenario............................................................. ...34 Table 1G: Infrastructure Costs....................................................................................... ...3u Table 11: Improvement Phasing,Plan .......................................................................... ...4^ Table L: Estimated Costs for Backbone Roadways.................................................... ... Table 13: Cost Burden Analysis -All Subareas........................................................... ...50 Table 14: Cost Burden Analysis -Area A .......................................................................5] Table 15: Cost Burden Anaivsis -Area B........................................................................5 Table 16: Cost Burden Anaivsis -Area C........................................................................53 Table I-/: Cost Burden Analysis -Area E........................................................................54 Table 15: Financing Sources for North Richmond.........................................................58 i. 1N TROD U CTI ON I INOIN CG l The Conrra Costa Count.-Redeveiopment Agency (the "Counrn RD A ) is interest`d in continuing to support new development in the North Richmond Redevelopment'.' -xoiec; Area_(the "Project Area" or "Study Area The The goal of the Counn!RDA is to improve the qualit, of Life for existing and future residents as well as the economic oDD_ ortu.3rttles and locational appeal afforded by the arrival of new businesses. Economic L Planning Svstems, Inc., in coniunction with Berrvman L Henigar, was retained to evaluate infrastructure needs, costs,and financing options for the industrial portion of the Studv Area as a next step in achieving these goals, initial discussion-with County RDA staff,property owners, and developers suggested that before the development of an infrastructure financing plan, there were a number of land use issues that needed to be recognized and discussed. As a result, the purpose of the report was broadened to consider real estate market forces,land use policy issues, and infrastructure challenges. The key findings of the report are described below, iollo,wed by a description of the report organization. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS For mane vears, Contra Costa Countv has been seeking to expand industrial uses and bring new jobs to the northern portion of the Study Area. The County is now pursuing watts in which it can improve infrastructure and accelerate new development and job opportunities in the Area. This report provides a technical basis for this effort. ThEe report evaluates the market opportunities and constraints,the infrastructure challenges, and a range of land use policy scenarios to help identify the key poifcy choices required to direct future growth and development in the Study Area. The kev findings of the report are summarized belm,,-. 1. The existing, northern, industrial portion of the North Richmond area.i; currently underutilized (see Figure 1). The nonresidential portion of North Richmond currently includes a range o; uses, generally falling under the light industrial, heavy industrial, and service commercial use types. The uses are scattered throughout the Study Area with a number of vacant areas. Other parcels inciude businesses that generate Tawe; levels of jobs, such as storage vards. Large tracts of land are also currenth publicly owned rbr a range of purposes and some sites ma v require slgnlrlc--ant environmental remediation. While many successful businesses thrive in the Stu& Area and ne1N ones have arrlyed, as a whole, the Area i sl,=fi Canti unaerutihzed. c° U o , , _. Iy. .. zz tb .z ar 1 a ✓ a /. tr i 0 7 1 y I' 4� lig. C IS 41 • b �� .< Ig �G -1 E IL� � ,Y„ '- TJI 1 a ,, c;;,4....tip_. _ � �• ;:. i ti _ 1.yyy.�eV , /Yv 7 r 7r 'rN'l✓.Ylt/7'75':. - y r ��iY�x... 7'�r� M ✓ _ I _ ,1 ,,„�� r ✓ C`O'Y rr I ti� J �nr r,'�, ry,✓�3±u'✓' N�.�aJ �r�'��N�. ,{i'�r�., _ r yr�r {-,r�Y�H✓,�`'' ��. � ,��yyJ ��{y�' � ��1 0 iisr_iii.G�� \ LL- Tina 1 kenrri IVOi[i1 R16777107111 RMCVC1017771cnL)11"01CC[,91-C=C.JILIAB rcnrunni 7.200r. _. North Richmond has a number of comvetitive advantages that could iieh spu-, the attraction of significant amounts of nein industrial develorment. x The central location of the North Richmond area in the Bay-Area economy-and its link=ages via Richmond Park-way to the region's transportation network are positive attributes. in addition, the reiative affordability of land as well as the availability of large contiguous tracts of underutilized land provides opportunities for large developments. To make good on its potential, the Studv Area will need to start to address the priman,challenges associated with the lack: of infrastructure and community image. If addressed, North Richmond will be able to compete effectively for neve industrial development with other cities and areas in western Contra Costa Counta. 3. EPS'industrial-market analusis indicates that North Richmond could capture Up to 1.6 million square feet, or about 145 acres, of industrial development through 2030. North Richmond has attracted some industrial development over recent vears. The level of additional industrial development attracted beyond that currently in the pipeline will depend on the Studd Area's ability to overcome its primary challenges. Depending on the success of its efforts, the North Richmond area is expected to capture between 10 and 33 percent of the West County's new industrial development, which is equivalent to between 40 and 145 acres of industrial land development through 2030. This compares to a total of about 500 acres of available land for new light industrial or commercial uses. Recently,residential developers arc particularly interested in developing housing in the northern portion of North Richmond. The residential real estate market is currently very strong in the Bae Area,ire large part because of an historic undersuppiy of housing in the region. Contra Costa Count: and the North Richmond area are no different, with developers seeking opportunities for infill development. The KB Homes deveioT)ment is a signal of this demand, as is the interest of Signature Properties in developirt, housing in the industrial portion of North Richmond. The nature of demand in North Richmond is primarily from young families and first-time homebuyer in the West County area who 1Aish to remain in the area, but cannot currenth: find suitabie andior affordable housing. The preferred housing type is for small-lot, single-famiiv detached development. J P'\14000s,14051 rich'%1—TV,1405 im: 020606na r"mal kcnor: NO-,till iaci7777071d Reacvcia77771crt T rolcci Aroc Srudu rcnrunrl: _, 20Gr The redevelopment of the north portion o f hr Nortii Richmond area faces c number of challenges. The condition of the Study Area's infrastructure represents an immediate problem to attracting neva development. While Richmond Parkway anchors the Area's transportation infrastructure,significant road improvements are recruired to provide east-west linkages throughout the Study Area. Storm drain issues are also significant in certain areas, and water and sewer deficiencies are also present. In addition to the infrastructure challenges, the urban problems of high crime and unemplovment rates in the Studv Area create negative percept that may affect some business owners' willingness to locate in North Richmond. 6. This report evaluates four different areas and three different land use policy scenarios to help draw conclusions concerning future redevelopment opportunities (see Fiogme 2 and Table 1). This report divides North Richmond into five areas,with four of the five evaluated as part of this analysis (the fourth, Area D, is.the existing residential area). Of the 800 acres in the four relevant areas,Just over 500 acres are assumed to have redevelopment potential based on current land ownership for the purposes of this analysis.1 In addition, the report considers three different land use poiic,,scenarios. Scenario 1 assumes that existing, General Plan land use designations remain as then are and oniv industrial development is allowed in the Studh,Area. Scenario?, inciudinc Scenarios 2a,2b, and 2c, assumes that different portions of Area C are designated for residential development. Scenario assumes that land use designations do not restrict development and that residential development occurs wherever there is developer interest, estimated at over 200 acres. The scale o f the Studil Area's redevelopment opportunities far outweighs the most optimistic estimates of industrial land demand. With approximately 500 acres of land potentially available for redevelopment, the tour areas in the Studv Area provide ample land far redevelopment. With industrial land demand estimated at up to 145 acres through 2030, areas A, E, C, and E provide sufficient land well bevond 2030. Given the strength of the residential market, land use pohm, Scenarios 2a.2b, 2c, and 3 consider the re- designation of 60, 110, and 710 acres of land, respectively, for residential deveiopment. The other iand includes vubh6v owner and recentiv oeveioved areas. I'.',740CKW,1405inri"i•, —Cm 1405)x,! 02060..m- , - Y F 40,S r Ti ST A,'. 4 .......... 1 - cz — I�SIV1LT4S�T T I �4 UI' I 7_0 Vpl r_ = yi i p .._.. �L.. — t s rr-: -_;-•t l—f;'t TJf11Y1_��7` I!!�ll:t ,-_,; -,�. E L CO , � — ;islgT-- _— uZul Afl?�T._ MLIJ �; _..•tel p cY plo ------------ - ---- s J Z i I a _- .... __ ._. - .. ........ — i u. `a r i Table 1 Deveiopment Potential by Scenario North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area Study: FPS#14051 Item Area A Area 6 Area C Area E: Total Total Acres ..315 170 260 65 800 Deveionabie Acres 163 86 210 35 81 rr"AP.Assumptions(rounded) 0.25 (all areas) Units/Acre Assumptions 6 tall areas) Scenario 1:Existing General Plan Industrial Acres 163 66 21D 35 S14 Residential Acres 0 0 D 0 0 industrial Deveiopment(sq. ft.) 2.000.000 930.000 2,290.000 380.000 5.600.()00 Residential Development(units) 0 0 0 0 0 Scenario 2a: Portion of Area C (Baseline) (1) industrial Acres 183 86 150 - 35 454 Residential Acres 0 U 60 0 60 industrial Development(sq. ft.) 2.000,000 930.000 1.630.000 380.000 4.940.000 Residential Deveiapment(units) 0 0 480 0 -4 BO Scenario 2b: Portion of Area C (Moderate)(2) Industrial Acres 183 86 100 35 404 Residential Acres 0 0 110 0 110 Industrial Development(sq. ft.) 2000,000 930.000 1.090.000 3B0.000 4,400.00D Residential Development (units; D 0 860 U 860 Scenario 2c: Portion of Area C (Aggressive". industrial Acres 16 : _ 66 U 35 30ti Residential Acres U U 210 G 210 Industrial Deveiooment(sq. ft.) 2.000.000 930.000 U 360.000 3.310.000 Residential Development (units) 0 0 1.680 0 i.6 SO Scenario 3:Market-Driven (3) industrial Acres — — — 304 Residential Acres - -- — — 210 Industrial Development(sq. ft.) — - — - 3.310.000 Residential Deveiopment iunits) — -- -- -- 1.SBO (1)Assumes or000sed Sionature Properties oevetooment.ts oermmed in Area (2)Assumes residential aevetooment oermrtteo unoer BrooKsiae Avenue in Area (31 Assumes residential oeveiooment is oermmed to❑ccur.wnerever aeveiooers are tnterestec Residential aemand is assumed to oe for 210 acres wanm the next twenty vears Sources:berrvman 8 Henida,:economic v Planrnnc Svstems,in: economic G Ptannmp Svstems.in: 272006 C P 1140003114051ncnlMoaetstt405tmcd5.xn Tina! [tcnar: Nnrri:P.icimionr Iicaeacianmcr.: Proiec Ager.�ruov r"corunri 200, E. Infrastructure needs and costs varix substantialh! big scenario. An investment of about S2e.1 million is required to provide adequate "base y " backbone inirasiructure to the Stud .Area.j investment is required in roadway improvements, right of way acquisition, and water. wastewater, and storm drain improvements. This level of inirastructure.improvement will support industrial development throughout the Study Area. Additional infrastructure investment ME be required to support residential development. Precise estimates have not vet been developed, though applying typical costs of between 510,000 and 516,000 per unit depending an the location within area C indicates an additional $5.5 million investment associated with Scenario 2a, an additional S15.2 million associated with Scenario 2b, and an additional 529.0 million associated with Scenario 2c. The location of residential development under Scenario 3 is uncertain, though applying the same per unit cost estimates suggests an additional infrastructure cost of 529.0 million, the same as under Scenario 2c(see Table 2). 9. Infrastructure needs and costs also van/ substantialhi inl area. There are significant differences in the infrastructure needs by area. Area C requires the largest investment in base infrastructure of x15.4 million. Areas A and E require comparatively low infrastructure investments of$3.25 million and 51.01 million,while Area E requires a relatively high level of investment given its small size. The majority of the backbone roadwav improvement., and right-oi- way acquisition., and all the drainage improvements are in Area C. The residential development proposed 1AU primarily add ini:astructure costs to Area C, with the exception of Scenario 3 that could add them in a number of different subareas. '10. The combination c"fintrastructure cost estimates and development potential indicate sigiiificantizy,different. ,financial feasibility chalienges by area. As shown in Table 3, the cost burden represented by the base infrastructure requirement, varies significantiy by area.' The cost burden in Area A is 51.74 per square foot of land development through 203C)and S1.26 per square foot for Area E. in contrast,Area C ha., a cost burden of S-7.44 per square toot and Area E has a cost burden o; 53.76 per square foot Land values nrpicaihr need to be three times higher for the relevant land use than the cost burden. If all of this burden were placed on new private development, Areas.'i and E would be able to tarn- the resnectlye cost burderis if average land values are over S5.50 Der square toot. Potential deveiopment through 2030 w scenario i;oaseri on the indusrriai market anaivsis and the assumption that new indusmal aevelonment is spread even v b. area. . P.V 40Ui!;`.74 Ci i ntc\hrorrf V S CS i rr�_D?OGuii.ac: Table 2 infrastructure Costs North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area Study: EPS#14051 (;:est In Mililor, SS improvement Type Area A Area E Area C Area E Other T otaI Base infrastructure (1) Backbone Roadways 51.94 50.03 S9.9/ S0.B5 S1.90 515.25 Richt-of-Way Acquisition 50.49 50.00 53.81 50.4E 50.00 54.78 Backbone Water Distribution $0.82 50.36 $0.94 $0.15 $0.00 5??9 Backbone Wastewater Convevance $0.00 50.00 50.75 $D.00 50.00 $0.75 Backbone Drainaae 50.00 $0.00 52.97 50.00 $0.00 52.97 Subtotal 53.25 $1.01 $18.44 $1.48 $1.90 $26.08 Additional (Residential) infrastructure (2) Scenario 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 Scenario 2a $0.00 $0.00 55.52 $0.00 $0.00 $5.52 Scenario 2b S0.00 $0.00 $15.18 $0.00 $0.00 $15.18 Scenario 2c $0.00 $0.00 $28.98 $0.00 $0.00 S28.98 Scenario 3 -- - - - - 528.98 Total infrastructure Costs Scenario 1 K.25 51.01 S1B.44 51.48 S'..90 526.08 Scenano 22 53.25 $1.01 523.96 $1.4B 51.90 531.60 Scenario 2b 53.25 51.01 533.62 51.48 51.90 $41.26 Scenario 2: 53.25 51.0! 541.42 51.48 51.90 $55.06 Scenario 3 -- -- - - - S55.06 i)Tne Dase infrastructure can supoon rnaustrial oevetooment tnrouoh the area (2)Additional infrastructure represents the additional infrastructure reouired to su000n residential oeveioomen; Cost estimates are very prenmmary ano are Daseo on Der unit oackoone costs of Detween 110.000 and 518.000 Der acre Source berrvman P,Menmzr�bconomtg C.Planning Svstems.in-- Economic E Prannrno Svsrem_.in_ 21W200P is P:I1405tncnvleoorr1t4051mod5.xrc iabie 3 base intrastructure Cost Burden by Area (1) North Richmond Redeveiopment Project Area Study BPS#1405, Item Area A Area S Area C Area = Total -Gross Acres 315 170 250 65 800 Developable Acres 183 66 210 35 514 Potential Land DeveioomenfThrouch 2030 Acres 52 24 59 10 145 Land Sq. Ft. 2.253.09E 1,053.069 2,582..556 427,475 6,316,200 Base infrastructure Cost(2) S3.927.763 $1,326,776 $19,216,869 S1.608.590 $26.080.000 Cost Burden per Sq.Ft. $1.74 $1.26 $7.44 $3.76 $4.13 (land Sq. Ft.thru 2030) Required Land Value(3) $5.28 53.82 S22.55 $11.40 $12.51 (1 The base mtrastructure can support industrial development tnrouoh the area. (2)Includes"otner"costs Mat serve full area distriouted by proportion of developmem. (3)Lana value reouired to suppon cost ourden,assuming no public suosidres and a 33 percent lien to value ratio Source:Economic P,Piannrno Svstems, in:. Economic G Prammnc Svsrem�.me 2/")ROOF- O u:114000s114057rchlMooelsll4057mod5.xc r fila 1 icct)nr' Nnrtc-kicnmrn)d keacrciann7Cr. i-rolcc.nrr C.Snlirl: rCrn)nry 200 industr-al development.howeve.. is unlikeiv To Ce able to command value-- of over S20 pe-square foot as would be required in urea C and may aiso sTrur—gie to command land values sufficient To support the cost burden in Area I. 11. Existing land values vary by area and arc increased bit speculation related 7;to the potential for residential development. Land values vans based on the specifics of the site. though recent conversati-ons with real estate brokers provide an indication of current values. Land suitable for residential development commands values in the ranae_of S20 to 540 Ln per square toot. The value of industrial land is harder to determine, as the 1 and prices of the industrial land are currently/ inflated because of speculation concerning conversion to residential. under current market conditions,in most cases, pure industrial land values will be below S10 per square toot. 12 The introduction o f residential development into Area C provides a larger mase of higher value development to fund the high infrastructure costs. The introduction of residential development into Area C under Scenarios 2a,2b, and 2c increases overall infrastructure costs in the area. Scenarios 2a and In reduce the per land square 'foot cost to less than 55.50 per land square foot, though Scenario 2c reduces it b-,,less to about 56.60 per land square foot i,seP -Table 4). The more significant impact of the introduction of residential development into Area C are the higher land values commanded relative to industrial development and the associated ability of new development to cam: a. larger proportion of the cost burden of the base infrastructure, as well as the additional residential inrrastructure requirements. 13. The preferred character of the area, the desired pace of development, and infrastructure funding challenges should all help dictate the preferred land zUsc Policies and infrastructure financing strategu. unless Scenario 1 or 3 is specifically preferred by the Counn- and the North Richmond community-, Scenarios 2a, 2b, and/or 2c wouid cataivze redevelopment. Scenario 1 will maintain the existing, character of the Study- Area and see gradual redevelopment,but will not support much of the infrastructure improvements required. Scenario 3 is likely to lead to land use conflicts in numerous iocations that will likeiv hinder ruture industrial cievelonmen . The managed, but fiexibie-approaches of Scenarios 2a, 2b, and 2c appear to offer a better path. If properly implemented.these scenarios could provide aernanded housin integrated into the existing communin, and support infrastructure cievelopment in support of new industrial development and lob-c. limey challenges would include buffering and shieiding industrial development from the nev- residential development. 20 740Ws 74GSinnrlrronr 17405im: 02U(Gu.ac: Table 4 Cost Burden in Area C by Scenario. North Richmond Redeveiopment Project Aree Study: EPS#140511 Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Item i 2A 26 2C Gross titres 250 250 250 250 Deveieoabie Acres 210 210 210 210 Potential Land Deveiooment Throuah 2030 Acres(1) 59 106 146 210 Land Sq. Ft. 2.562.558 4,70-2.290 6.356.565 9.147.600 Infrastructure Cost Base $19,216,869 $19,216.869 $19.216.869 $19.216,869 Additional (New Residential) $0 $5.520.000 $15.180.000 $28.980.000 Total $19.216.869 $24,736.869 $34.396,869 $48,196.869 Cost Burden per Land Sq.Ft.Through 2030 Base $7.44 $4.09 $3.02 $2.10 Additional Mew,Residential) $D.00 $1.17 52.39 $4,56 Total 57.44 $6.26 $5.41 $6.66 (1)Scenano 2a mciuoes 60 acres of restoemial and a Dr000nlonate Development of moustnal Development(4B acres)relative to Its fano available for moustnal oevelooment. Scenario 20 Incluoes 110 acres of resioential and a or000n)onate Devetooment of lnoustria! oevelooment f36 acres)relative to Its lana available for Inoustrial oevelooment. Scenano 2c Inciuoes 210 acres of resioential and no moustrial oevelooment. Source Berryman G Henloar:Economic Planninc Systems.Inc. cconomr_G hannmc Svsrems in: 27,200: 1; - -1140005114051nch1Alooelsu4051mcc5.rr- rm�l it^nmi ivOriil kicimronc kenevcirnmlcn' Frnlc .hr er,study rcbrunrl .300:= 14 Mere are a number of nnancinE niechanisnis that could help fund the need ter:' inn-astructure and the associated operational costs. The variability of infrastructure costs and the pace of development by area and by scenario will have significant effects on financing need and availabilitt•_ Any public financing mechanisms must be considered in terms of its effect on&ve financial feasibility of development as well as their abilin7 to fund different types of cost. The available financing mechanisms fall into the following categori es: (1) one-time developer contributions, including develop_ ment a-areements and development impact fees; (2)ongoing development charges, including Benefit Assessment District assessments and Communin,Facility District special taxes; (3) tax increment financing, and (4) other funding sources (grants). REPORT ORGANIZATION Beyond this introductory chapter, Chapter II describes the existing conditions facirig new development in North Richmond, including existing uses and 'land owners'hit:::'s as well as land use designations and the entitlement process. Chapter III considers the market opportunities for industrial development in the Study Area and the potenti al capture of industrial development over the next 25 years. Chapter It%provides an overview of the increasing housing development pressures in the area and the types of buvers and housing that would drive future residential development in the area. Chapter V outlines'three potential land use policy scenarios, representing the full anRe of land use poiicy approaches. The differences between the scenarios are evaluated .qualitatively. Chapter VI considers the existing infrastructure needs in North Richmond as well as the additional infrastructure needs associated with future development under the different land use poucy scenarios. Chapter VII concludes the report with a discussion of the possible financing options. 1_ !'.\7400v511405 i nth.nrnml\740 im'_O.Ob0u.ac: 1I. XISTINu LA1��D USS, CONDITIO?\�-; This report focuses on the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area, an unincorporated island in the Cit 7 of Richmond under the jurisdiction of Contra L.osra Count, (the "Count57"). As shown in Figure 1, the North Richmond Redeveioprnen', Project Area consists of the entire unincorporated area of North Richmond, and is comprised of approximately 1.000 acres bound on the south, molest, and north by the Cin of Richmond, and on the east by the City of San Pablo. This chapter describes some of the existinc,conditions pertinent to future development in North Richmond. Existing infrastructure conditions are discussed later in the report. EXISTING LAND USE AND LAND OWNERSHIP For the purposes of this study, North Richmond is divided into five areas", as shown in Figure 2. Area A refers to the area to the north of Parr Boulevard, Area B refers to the area to the west of Richmond Parkway and south of Parr Boulevard, Area C refers to the area between Wildcat Creel:and Parr Boulevard to the east of Richmond r1arkway, Area D refers to the area to the south of Wildcat Creek and to the east of Richmond Parkway, and Area E refers to the area south of Parr Boulevard and north of San Pablo Creek- Current land uses in each of these area.; are briefiv described below. AREA A Area A totals approximately 315 acres and is a mix of industrial and storage uses as wel) as vacant land. A large proportion of the land (80 acres)to the west of Richmond TD arkwav is the West Contra Costa Sanitary Land Fill. Most of the remaining land is rmvate)v owned with about 30 acres directly to the west of Richmond Parkway and 7.60 acres to the east. Existing private uses include a construction compan- ; consrruction equipment selier; recreational vehicle storage center: a rock and soil wnolesaie:;heai-\: equipment rental faclury; crane rental faciiir;; boiier and burner sales, service, and installation companv; a distribution services company; a metal iaorica=; and nurseries. AREA E Area B totals approximate]-, 170 acres. A significant propomon of this area is owned b� the West Counn,Wastewater Diistnct, " ri additional acreaue in recreational and open space designations. Private uses in this area include a baling Compare',nurseries and greenhouses, tow storage yards and dismantiers, wood recvciers and metal workz. is k',7 40W:'74 Gi i n d.t rtrnnri`,la n;;m: 0?06Gann: Tina 1 RcDG:': Noriin I-icinmmla kcaeveiom m' PrO1CC krL c Drum, rcoruoni 7.200c AREA Area C totals approximately 250 acres. This area is also industrial in nature with a number of vacant sites, but includes some newer construction. Public uses.occupi- about 40 acres and include the North Richmond Water Reclamation Center at the northwest O_- the =the area and the West Counn- transfer station (Integrated Resource Recovers Facility/..IRRF")to the southeast. Thev also include the A's Luck} North Richmond Baseball Field. Private uses include nurseries; a plastic, Mass,and metal recvcling center; a steel drum container manufacturer;and new industrial distribution/'ware't-iouse spaces on Central Street. AREA D Area D is distinct from the other areas as a residential neighborhood and totals approximateh, 200 acres. There are hundreds of housing units in the core of the neighborhood. The single-family detached homes and multifamil57 complexes were predominantly built in.the early 1940s to welcome workers to kaiser Richmond shipyards during World War E. Many apartment buildings were built ternporaril�-,but many of these housing units still remain toda},, and are owned and managed by'the Housing,Authority of the CountS7 of Contra Costa(HACCC). There is a number of boarded up units and vacant lots throughout Area D,in addition to vacant sites on the eastern edge of the area. New single-family detached housing has been developed on the western side of the area at Parkwav Estates and IB Homes is in the process of developing a 20-acre site adjacent at the comer of Richmond Parkway and Wildcat Creel:. Affordable housing developers are also active throughout the area. Major public land holdings are held br the Contra Costa Housing Authority. AREA E Area E totals approximately 65 acres and is located south of Parr Boulevard and nodi of .San Pablo Creek. The area is a mix of developed and vacant parcels. Fri vately-owned land in this area has uses similar to those in Area E. 7' P 114000;V40�irith licmarll140.i1rn;_0:060u.aa: anal RC7307f IJnrii: 1":ici7mnn��i:edercirmmc7:i F-rorr:.nrer, Srttd,: YCRI"i(RT1% T.00rr'. LAND USTE DESIGNATIC)NTS/ENTiTL-M7-NT nROCESS LAND USE DESIGNATIONS The Contra Costa County General Pian 199=-2010 the "General Plan")land use designations and zoning are shown in Figures 3 and 4. The land use designations are described bti,, area below. • Area A. With the exception of the publicly owned land with open space and public facilities land use designations,the designations in Area A are for light industrial and heavv industrial uses. Light industrial uses are permitted to the west of Richmond Parkway and heavy industrial uses to the east. • Area B. In between the pubiic/semi-public land use designations of the Wastewater District and the recreational land owned by the EBRPD, the private land has a heavy industrial zoning. • Area C. Area C is predominantiv designated for heavy industrial uses. Li-ht industrial uses are permitted adjacent to the Wildcat Creek that separates Area C from residential development in Area D. In addition, the sites with public uses have recreational and public designations. • Area D. Most of the area is classified as SH (Single-family Residential-High Density), witn some 1\4L(Multiple Family Residential-Low Density), MM (Multiple Family Residential-Medium Density), and MH (Multiple Family, Residential-High Densit57). These designations correspond to actual densities of between nye and 30 units per acre. • Area E. Most of this area is classified as OS(Open Space; and HI (Hea«t- industrial�. The types of uses aliowed for li-nt inausm7 can range rrom research. engineering, product development and testing, and sales development to light manufacturing', warehousmg,, distribution centers, and commercial nurseries. Support retail and service uses are included in this categon,. The nrDes or allowable uses for heavr,,.indusm: accommodate a wide variety- o` 1nQUSnlal activities, mclUQlncr on retinln�, contractor s storage yards, warehouses, commercial nurseries, and machine shODE. Similar to light mausm-, tills inciudes retail and service uses. For proiects invoiving auto dismantiinr, vards must be enclosed and outside storage or vehicles is prohibited. Operators of hea« indusm: are reouired to Drw,nde sufficient visual open space and/or landscaped screening D£t4Veen inQUstrial Operations and adjacent resmenrial or recreanonai activities. i' P•.1400ust WOSi—h i—.rI11405im: OMW.ncr (D wrl 7 Wei iI 0 r TilC, IN low V3 aj ec ET V1r) cz. ...... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... ....... .... '{U F1P Z, iN, W tL RU ............. Sy Y 'Z N .......... Lan at A. N c � & 5 Z3y kmzi j t 'T fi ,� u3'1. 4¢2 c Z r �, 'yf€l do t � �sJI 3 r4 az vy r� F r'P, .rF^Gc � •'k"P .y r'f s!�I tk t„r ,jam y�l t --d .-, �- En a E N I'fir yrn 'S'e= F ,`,�r,''l,j o 1l®wp .+. Oj* �.` J ui 91. .a� T-.a5s t'�H'ty� �3'Jp' Y V wgp 1.5 r x 4 mom• a`TV', A4. KW�5. CID 1 t— iL : ..m F-��u i J� r- 11 2"1rrq "Ozit I n x �x� ...��1 I�� *�� f 1 r-_ 1 apea�,t�.-—.�i y ��.--m-"'iu - �I• ,�_,�� �_).It �[ e � .-..S'^ _.�__� rl�ia .��j�.,.��I c I C� �•_ i��rl '����� >��) �i� Y, — ...F t 'I.>. t TPt l 5 4 1 �? i 9 7T719* - - p hW Jul E!_ TBEER. T.N s � . Rei 1ti ;�� 2 z , ; t.. C L „ CA IlL z v � 3 f - r a � ^g ”- .,_,nuur- .Ruv:. incz l ftcvnr: North Richmond Reaerciormtent Proicc: .7r=-!c Srudi: rcorunri-- 200c ENTITLEMENT PROCESS Development Application Review* In addition to conforming with existing land use designations and zoning,paving relevant fees and exactions, and following processing and permit procedures, development applications must conform to a more detailed set of conditions outlined in the North Richmond P-7 Zoning document. This document presents the key set of General Plan Land Use Designation maps, land use matrices, and design guidelines. According to the "Conditions for Development and Use of Propert T in the North Richmond Area" section of the document, all development and land use must com_ph; with all criteria contained in the Preliminary Plan Map, the forth Richmond Land Use Matrix,the Development Standards, and the Development Guidelines Chart as described below: • The Prehminaryr Plan Map. The map shows land uses, circulation, and other development criteria. • The North Richmond Land Use Matrix. The matrix defines land uses by gate-on7 and further-bv sub-category, and denotes which uses are not permitted, permitted, permitted by administrative review, and require a land use permit based on the type of zoned land they intend to occupy (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial,and open space). • The Development Standards. The standards list 124 conditions for deveiopin- and using sites in the North Richmond Area,including graphics of acceptable and unacceptable design standard. • The Development Guidelines Chart. The chart provides standards, policies:and Options for development in the Study Area. 1i 4V40aUsV4G5inrh\nronriV405 fir• 02UfiDo.acr III. 1NDL?-TRIAL IVi-kRKi 7 UPPOP`TtJNITIE Tills chapter describes the level of potential demand for ruture industrial development in the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area as well as the constraints to achieving this potential. The Studv Area continues to provide opportunities for industrial development. in addition to data anaivsis and evaluation, interview's were conducted with numerous real estate brokers who are active in the area.= PAST PERFORMANCE As described in Chapter U. Areas A, E, and C represent the industrial portion of North Richmond. Historically home to maior petroleum,railway, and shipping industries, these areas now include a mix of older,underutilized industrial land and a small amount of new industrial uses including light industrial, warehouse/distribution, and flex office space. Current private employers include local manufacturers that produce products such as metal barrels, fixtures, drums, and pails, as well as agricultural interests and construction companies. North Richmond saw significant interest from industrial developers during the height of the economic boom in the late 1990s. The Studs- Area was one the rev,! areas within the inner core of the Bav Area that offered developers large tracts of affordably priced underutilized or vacant industrial land. The Richmond area, including North Richmond,benefited from companies that moved out of more expensive markets like Berkele�', Emeryville, and Marin County. The rate or growth has fallen somewhat over the last few vears because of the economic downturn. PROTECTED INDUSTRIAL DEMAND IN THE MARKET AREA The West Count l Market Area, which includes the cities of Richmond iincluding the unincomorated area of North Richmond), El Cerrito, San Pablo, Hercules, and Pinole, is projected to add an additional 33,300 jobs to its current base of 6-.500 over the,next _5 vears. Of these new jobs, about 25 percent are expected to be accommodated by research and development (RLD)/fle>:, warehouse. and industrial space;about 35 percent as office space; and the remainder in retail, institutional. orotherenvironrnents (see Table 1.4 Broker inten6eweci inciude Todd Severson of Colliers intemariona ; ionn TrouL-nron.Cor.,Lawr'ene•, Real Estate Parmer,, LL:; and ionr: T sem of it. Gert.. Inc. 4 Cltner refers to tool tnat do not occurn, buiidin-_space,such as construction lobs. l�? !''19GIn..'19GSinrh'.i(rnrrf',14G:iml G2G6Go.ar = CLI CJ N - [Y) - tS L- - - LLD N In 61 o - Ln M [\' c LD - M+ Ln I- r� N O N C. O W LD - - CL) LD p _ c000) l - c c a-, r" e co Lr, c• mu- j Ln — LD CD Ln V, >_ 0 0 0 0 0 OI O G D o 0 0 OI O O O O 0 o OI O Nl y - 0 M N O D LD ^I C O C O N Ln MI C ! ;= N N LD I� NIT U) C m MI M O O C D M 071 LD N N Ln W QI m N M m M Lnl M - N CD N m NI M - N T M co L CD 0 OI O N - M In NI LD .� c 0 O 1 W c c I M O N a) M D Ln r p c, - - M Ln LD D Ln m - V) I N 0 0 - 1- m O r O N - L7) N N Ln CD C M D M M I'- m m m C o m m p I- LD' co LD - M C Ln .7 L C N N - T - LV oIU M. D ole N ` C O O O o OI O o 0 0 0 Of O o D 0 0 OI O C o o C M -I cn 0 co C I- C 1-I O ^ L O M O ml n N d O_ O In )� 071 O D C Q I� -I O r m m (D I� CI LA N M -I O - r) Ln NI M a) (D UC') N -I to T r - m Ln o -I Ln N -1 CD m CD M C m M co In (n m O C N M l!') N O C Co I� N l^_ 1- C LT CO D M LD L (D O M M ^ Q N M (T 0) U) L7, I fD C O N M m Ln.O C O m - Ln C O N N 1- 0 co LD 1L - M C M M L`7 - N Q M M M N N N N N N NEN Oio N p 0 0 0 0 OI O D O o 0 01 O o D D D 0 OI O O O a) CT) M M, ml LD O C LD M (,4 Of C O OD O a) In Lnl- N - LV - Q CIO G a) (D N NI C LD O (D M L MI CD T NI en - C m M7 O N m (D LD —I LD T T LD a) N 0 Lo C N M TI cn 0 i< O T 7 0 0 0 0 0 010 0 0 0 0 0 g0 o D o 0 0 0l0 -_ G - - 07 -1 N - a, m - N M,LD I� O 1- 0) co a)I O N LD N m W MI N a+ M M N ISI tp- C (D N - �' lnl tD D O M LD N - -1 LD Ln O ah I� Q ^ Ln ^ - N 1- _ u M NI O I O - ^ N -1 CD - ^ - M -I T N - M CA (D Q)I N m N D In =.L!) I-I- f0 LD O O D N i D G O o 0 G of Co O O o O D OI O G O O D O OI O - U) :t` CJ D - I- LI) R M - - T - CO co:W r� - - LD Lt. -1 M _ ai p M N LD N N LL Lnl LD N m a, LTi C LCI m O LD U-1 1- -12 I 7 O N C 1 N - N lr O I_ CTI Ln _ _ _ _ _ - "" CLJ lr.• - NI M t<1 - - C(, -1 M - �- p' Ln - - M -1 LD N a) L M LC, NI CD m W N - t:G C G M LI C all L 4 t u a u U) O O D O O OI O 0 0 0 D O OI O 0 0 0 0 0 OI - - N' F •� NI (N I. co - (D ml N (D - (+) (DILD < Z m N " a) ^ Q. OI LL) N Q a) N N MI Ln C Ln M, - - 1-1 Cl O = al N O M 1- NI--i N C') LL• - L`') CTI!' - m - O ODa)I LD < M Q p - - C - - NLD N N L - L) N!T = L!.• N I- M co O Lnl Le 1' p, L > L M d ,m L v: _ V. v, _ r_ a ti (D r a i m o d U o u x _ ui N LL V) L) V) u N O - � r C 7 T C O Vi C m D O Ln CU a m D p Vl ul �_ N V) u+ r Lr.• v, r I a) rn _ U a LU LS L 6 _ 1 _ M l Ln to C -I O U L L; U. CUO C LL' d m r L M I L Z < r m a _ u a r >' r a r I c = G u o L. ' C I CT. C" (➢ N = p �� O. tG a. _ p� C C) 6I G: m (U = _N - a = T . M. L' 7 rrttc2l iccnor° IJorti7 iichmond kcamicmmc7:' Proiccr Arcs;Sruav �corunn; T.066 Based on En;' spacewalK analysis, this lob growth urolection represents an expecte G demand for 8.1 million square feet of industrial space in the West County Markel _Area, or about 745 acres of land suitable for industrial development, assuming a typical floor- area-rano of 0.25. This is equivalent to about 325,000 square reet of industrial demand each vear, about 30 acres or industrial land. Demand for office space is expected to total about 4.1 million square feet(see Table 61. SUPPLY PIPELINE AND NET DEMAND IIT THE MARKET AREA The current supply pipeline includes about 4.5 million square feet of workplace development, including RB D/flex. light industrial space, warehouse and distribution . space,and a small amount of office space. About 1.5 million square reet are approved or under construction, with the large majority, 3.0 million square feet,in the preliminary piaruting stages. Most of the space undergoing preliminary review will enter the market adually over the next ten years. About 700,000 square feet, 15 percent,of this pipeline is located in North Richmond, and about''.l million is in the Cin,of Richmond, about C5 percent(see Table 71. The largest proposed development in North Richmond is the Ponds project site General Plan re-designation that could create the opportunity for over 500,000 square feet of light industrial and office fie), space to the west of Richmond Parkway. Other expected locations of future industrial supply include the North Shore Business Park in Hercules where the Bio-Rad Laboratory is iocated, several locations in Pinole,the North Bav, Business Center, the Parkwav Commerce Center, the Point Pinole Business Park, and the Campus Bay Business Part:in the City of Richmond. As noted above, over the next 2� vears, a total of 1-12 million square feet of workspace development will be demanded, including 4.1 million souare feet of office space and 5.1 million square feet of industrial development. Subtracting out the industrial development in the suppiv pipeline, about a6 million square feet leaves an excess demand for about 4.5 million souare feet of industrial development in West Count-,-. COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES ADS'ANTTAGES The North Richmond Study Area has nvo pnman7 competitive advantages over other locations—price and land availabiht,,. The Study Area is one of the rev.' areas �,,,t&in the inner core of the Bav Area that offers a significant amount of vacant and underutiiized land at a relativeiv affordable price. As a result it has the opportunity to at«ac` businesses lookinc to keen their real estate costs logy,, or iookdng to expand. The pornon of the Studv Area located alone Richmond Parkway is also ven7 competitive in terms of transportation access, offering a more central location and more direct access to the �? .'U 40W;'•.74G�i nrii l krvn-7?14 Gi:rr:_0206U�.ae' Table 6 Projected Building Space and Land Demand in the West Counry Market Area i2D05-203D) North Richmond Redeveiopment Project Area Study: .P5 #14051 Total Demand Total Demand Total Demand Av-eraae Item 2005-2020 2020-2030 2000-2030 Annual Growth Building Space (Square Feet) West County (1) Warehouse/ industrial 4.870,200 3,246,800 6,117.000 324.660 Office/R&D 2.469.6D0 1.646.400 4.116.000 164.640 Total 7.339.800 4.893.200 12.233.000 489.320 North Richmond (2) Warehouse/Industrial 1,704,570 1,136,380 2,840.950 113.636 Office/R&D 864.360 576,240 1.440.600 57.624 Total 2,568,930 1,712.620 4.281.550 171.262 North Richmond (3) Warehouse/ industrial 487,020 324,660 811,700 32,468 Office/R&D 246.960 164.640 411.600 16.464 Total 733.980 489.320 1.223.300 48.932 Land (Acres) (4) West County (1) Warehouse/ industrial 447 298 745 30 Office/R&D 189 i 26 315 i Total 636 424 1.060 42 North Richmond (2) Warehouse/ industrial 157 104 261 10 Office/R&D 66 44 110 4 Total 223 148 371 15 North Richmond (3) Warehouse/ industrial 45 3D 5 Office/R&D 19 1 31 1 T ota l 64 42 106 4 (1) Based on ABAG emDiovment Dro)ections. Assumes 800 sc..tt.Der employee for warenouseiinoustrial iobs anC 350 sc.t.for of ice/R&D iobs (2) Assumes North Richmond will capture 35%of the total Der vear. (3'i Assumes North Richmond will capture 10%of the total Der vear. (4; Assumes a 0.25 fioor area ratio(FAR)for warenouser inousinai and a G.3 FAP,for ofiicel R&D fier.space. Sourc=_: ABAG Prolecuons 2005: Economic& Plannmc Svstems,inc. r —�conomrc Z Prannm:Svsrem=,m. 2/7,'2001 _ P:N4000511405trrcr)V400elnl4057mod5.xi- a c t s - > > _ Q) Y C m tD t6 t4 > > 0.1 U a) A V N 1[1 ID N p p 0 aj a 'o -o a v o ro m U u Q) a) _ tt) to Q,YN Of tT ST LL O O r l b G OI O N O M m CP m O tDl m i•� — O yr N O fD ^ tG l N 6t)m to tf+ m � O O C = Q {D t(D tflm tD m m ^ t, u� of to o G a o' b o Oi C, ^ N o 0 oII n m a+ OI m G OI C 0 0 Ot O ^ N 0 0 04 to m N Oi N m tt) O{ WS O 0 Oj O CV N C, O Oi C O IV ,.: �i c ai ai v, Q C) o tnl a - o tri o n m N !n! m O fA N O to m (Di O m N tD tIT N D N r`i m SD tni n til m m mi O c Q•LL N , U V: ut tll t v. G C c I I vi N 0 N C V� IG ut VI Al oo` o v DU a ai � p N "' N A3 •- _ n c o!M o `m Avg LRL AI 4: O:.O1 5 ry 111 _ _72 0. b O A, U1 r S I4 1 m G Q. A. et _ ✓ u _ v - p C' U G U a c a = S o C CU CD L�l LU L p � a C b C C. ✓' G G a L 4+ o G 'u, ¢ � C �= m J _ Q W C. =mcz1 iicnnr: North Richmond Rcdcvcimmicrr Prolcci Arc Snl61- tCDruC,n, .2000 Bay= Area's transportation infrastructure than industrial locations within Pinoie and Hercules. Richmond Parkwav acts as a maior thoroughfare connecting interstate&G (I-80) to interstate 580 (I 580 , providing direct and convenient access to markets throughout the region and State including Marin Count`-.the East Ba��, San;Francisco, and Sacramento Vallee. DISADVANTAGES 'Unlike the newly developing Hercules, the North Richmond community has struo bled for many vears with urban problems and the negative perception that comes along with them. For decades, the Studv Area has experienced higher than average rates of crime, blight, and unemployment than surrounding areas. While various community, efrorts are underway to improve the quality of life of North Richmond's residents, office users and, to a lesser extent,industrial users are sensitive to these social issues. Adciitiornally, the North Richmond Study Area offers fewer retail and commercial amenities for local emplovees than manv other locations within the Market Area (e.g., retail shoppinh centers including lunchtime establishments). Finally,infrastructure deficiencies also reduce the competitiveness of much of the North Richmond Area with manv sites presenting access and storm drain issues. These deficiencies add costs to cieveioprinent projects and threaten to remove the price competitiveness that is kev to the success of the Area. NORTH RICHMOND INDUSTRIAL PROSPECTS North Richmond has the potential to be competitive in capturing future industrial market demand in the West Countv Mtarket Area. If inrrastructure issues can be addressed, entitlement cielays and uncertainties addressed,, environmental remediation issues overcome, public services and improvements strengthened, retail options provided,suitable land assembled, and the ouaiin,of lire in the neighboring resideritial areas improved, the Stuciv Area could maximize its capture rate. Given its competitive position relative to the areas in West County, North Richmorzd ME be most competitive for industrial development,including warehouse and distribution,light industrial manufacturing, some RLD space, and fie): space (a mi:;of office, research, assembly, light manufacturing, and storage space). Most standard office/P.LD users will likeiv prefer to locate in Marina Ba,,, along Regatta Bouievard in Richmond or in the City of Hercules than in North Richmond. Pohcv decisions concerning the type Of 1nQL1SLTial Clevelopment pemlltteG v�L 3lSC affect the rale Oi nev.. inciustrlal construction. 7^ R 1400Js11405 inch lrrnnr111405 im t 020666xn* rural ic_-^vorr iJnrrl Ricnmonr kcdcicianmcl;i Prouci.4r�r.�n1d1: rcnrunrl.• -.300r POTENTIAL INDUSTRIAL CAPTURE RATES The ultimate capture rate will depend, in large par:, on the success of the Count, R-DA and other efforts to improve the Area and the land use and other policies adopted in the cominb vears. Vvithout strong efforts. the North Richmond area might be expected to capture about 10 percent of ruture, unmet industrial demand, wi-lile with a concerted and successful program its capture rate could increase to as much as 35 percent. These capture rates result in the following space and land demands (see Table B): • 10 Percent Capture. under this scenario, the North Richmond area would capture about 450,000 square feet of new development beyond projects already in the pipeline, or about 40 acres of new industrial land development. This is the equivalent of about 20,000 square feet or 1.5 acres each year over the next 25 years. • 35 Percent Capture. 'Under this scenario, the North Richmond area would capture about 1.6 million square feet of new development beyond projects already in the pipeline, or about 145 acres of new industrial land development. This is the equivalent of about 60,000 square feet or 6.0 acres each vear over the next 2.5 years. TYPES OF INDUSTRIAL DEMAND The North Richmond area will need to use its competitive advantages of lower priCe points and larger available areas to maximize its capture rate. In addition, it will need to appeal to the range of users interested in Norm Richmond locations. The Counter RDA has sought to maintain Areas A.,B.. and C as industrial uses, but also wants these areas to be more compatible with residential uses i e.g., less of an eyesore to those passing through the 5tuciv Area) and more emplovment-intensive. Counn, RDA policies reflect a preference for cieaner"iirht industrial users rather than more heavy industrial or distribution/warehouse uses. Preferred light industrial users inciude landscaping and construction contractors, office suppiy distributor:,, and small manufacturing operators. The Count, RDA has suggested that thev want new industrial users that can be housed in industrial business parks similar, to those in North Concord, Vallejo, and Fairfield. These paries are well-maintained with landscaping and ample parking for emplovees and customers, and do not have anv outside storage area Ior trucks or equipment. While such policies support the development of higher-value, more employment-Intensive industrial us--S, they'likely limit the•pace or industrial redevelopment in the area. Potential tenants are likely to range from smaller local supplier: and manufacturers to iaraer storage. dlsirlbutlon, and assernbiv tenants seekin-lar-e-spaces in busine-z5 par!; environments. The space requirements or these tenants needs are expected to range from. 5,00(1- to 10,000-souare root spaces in 40,000-square root or larger industrial condominium buildings to 25,000- to 100,000-square foo.spaces in large buildings, J'.1400Ds".J405)nrh,ttr nr11140iim1 020600.00: Table 6 Proiected industrial Demand in the North Richmond (2005-2030 North Richmond Redevelopment Proiect Area Study; =PS #14051 Buitdino Land Item Sq. Ft.y Acres West County Area Demand 8,100.000 745 West County Area Pipeline 3.600.000 331 .West County Net Demand 4,500,000 414 N. Richmond -10°o Capture 450.000 41 N. Richmond -35%i Capture 1,575,000 145 Source'. Economic&Pianninc Svsiems.tnz. cconomrc G Pianninc Svsremc.in: 6/7120057p P'N4000sV4057nchlMooelsl74057mod5.rrt sinal lienor: Nnrtil P.ici mmta Rcancionmelr Froicct/- rcc.Siudy re�ruari i T.200c similar to the spaces at Point Pinoie Business Park in the Cirn of Richmona and ''�50 Central Road in North Richmond. Developments are likely to require one tc) two parking spaces per 1,000 square feet and loading dock,-,.though the provision of two or more parking spaces will maximize user options. Landscaping and emplovee amenities, including pier.tables and benches, are likeiv to make the developments more competitive. There will also be a continued short-term demand for storage sps w aceith open-air vard space,the type or use that is currently not permitted by the Count,. P:J4000s V405aich,i,nW,146irn 0206,—nn: II \ . R�SIDENTIAL ��ARS E� UPPOI�TUNITIES This chapter provides an overview of demand for residential development in the l\Torth Richmond area, and, in particular, developer interest in converting underutilized o vacant industrial land in Areas A_, B,and C into residential uses. RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW The residential market throughout the San Francisco Bav Area has been exceptiona-11v strong for well over five vears. Spurred by continued population growth,historic housing shortages,lo-%A7 interest rates, and changing lending practices,housing prices have increased by an average of close to 10 percent each year in the Bay Area despi to the economic downturn. Coupled with the weakened office and industrial markets and the associated high vacancy rates, landowners and developers throughout the Bay-Are.3 have sought to obtain zoning changes for underutilized and vacant industrial land to residential. As described below, North Richmond is experiencing the same trend. RECENT AND PROPOSED PROJECTS As described above, Area D is the sole residential area in North Richmond. Much of the housing in this residential neighborhood, including single-family detached homes and multifami1v complexes, were built for workers arriving in the area in the early 194Ds and mane of the apartment buildings are now owned and managed by the Housing Authority of the County of Contra Costa. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS One newer, public/nonprofit-driven housing development, compieted by the Communin7 Housing Development Comoration or North Richmond (CHDC) and Oakland Community Housing (OCHI), is Par'xwav Estates on the western edge of,area D at Richmond Par'r.-wav and Gertrude Avenue. This development rias a total of 67 affordable and market rate single-ramify homes that were developed in 2000. Of ti to total, 39 units were sold to low-ana moderate-income households. At the time of initial sale, three- to five-bedroom., 1,46?- to 1.972-souare ioot homes sold for 5;140, 00 to 5164,000 in Phase I and S171500 to 5;19;, 00 in Phase II. Today., they are commanding asking prices o`5470,000 to S>490.000,which is almost three times the original sale price over the rive-vear period. p .: 74000s 114011 m,W, 1405!,1—0206w.r: 1-f17Ri� 1<C170r: Nnrih Rrchmomd Aeacvciornreni Prorcci Arer,Siutiv Pcnrunr7i 7, 200( APPROVED PROTECTS The last remaining large site in Area D was recently sold to KB Homes and has been approved for the development of 173 detached single-:amily homes on 20 acres, including both market-rate and below market-rate homes. The project, Bella Flora, will have a gross density of about E.5 units per acre. This site is located adjacent to Richmond Parkway near Gertrude Avenue. This is the first large,privately driven housing project in North Richmond in manor years, and reflects the increasing demand for housing development in the region as well as in the Richmond area. PROPOSED PROTECTS Signature Properties is looking to develop a 60-acre site, directly to the north of the KB Homes project, along Richmond Parkway and north of Wildcat Creek. L` approved, this will be the first major residential project in the industrial area of North Richmond. The project would likely include 300 to 350 units.,including single-family detached homes: tov,mnomes, and condominiums, with product densities ranging from 9 to 20 units per acre. Signature Properties may also set aside a portion of the area for retail development to enhance the appeal of the project. RESIDENTIAL PROSPECTS This section provides more detailed iniormation on the prospects for residential development in the North Ivchmond area and is based on interviews with developers and other real estate professionals who are evaluating the area. North Richmond's central location and relatively cheap land costs arF-, atr,actinn residential aeveiopers to the area. The recent interest from private residential developers, including LB Hornes and Signature Properties,provides a.strong indication of the potential demand fo- new housing development in the North Richmond area. MARKET NICHE The location, demographics, and nature of the area combined with communin7 concerns that new residential development is supportive ot and integrated witn the existing commurim,suggest a particular market ruche. In varCicular, voung families and nrs`- time homebuyers currently residing In West Count-\, are expected to anve new residential demand. These families are looking to stay in the general area and want to sta.v integrated with the broader communit,,, but are also seeking opportunities to purchase reasonabiv priced homes. At present, few such homes are avaiiable. The distance from transit and urban amenities as well as the importance of inteLratior, with �0 ?.:34000='.7403i,uh6111.3405 02060u.ar: rn)a Z i<cronr: Nnrii)Rici7r77onn Rcaciocionn7c77? Yro)ccAr c 5n16): rcoruari, 20(jr the communing means there will be less demand rrom voung proressionais. a group that is driving, much of the new construcnon and industrial conversion efrorts in other parrs of the Bav Area. TYPE OF HOUSINC The families interested in purchasing housing in the North Richmond area will primarily be interested in single-family detached'hc housing at lower to moderate prie points relative to market rate development elsewhere in the Ba-V Area. Small-lot,single- family detached development with net densities in the 8-to 12-unit-per-acre range and unit sizes in the 1,200-to 2.000-square foot range are most likely to provide this typ e of housing at more affordable prices. Attached product,in particular townhomes, could also attract a portion of the demand. PRICE POINTS Developers will need to charge prices as low as possible given the need to cover lar-<d and development costs, provide below-market rate units, and receive a return on investment. Prices in the high$300,000s into the mid-$400,000s are likely to achieve the highest absorption rates, though price points will increase through time if the resicl ential market continues its current trajectory. LOCATION AND AMENITIES Locations adjacent to other, residential development and close to amenities such as parks and schools will be preferred. Locations adiacent to hea-vy industrial uses will create too many use conflicts for both uses to continue,.though adjacencies to light industrial! service commercial uses with lower trip count,could work. The provision of amenities will be an important consideration if North lZichmond looks to expand its residential presence signincanthv. There are currently minimal retail uses nearby, and developers may, loot: to provide some small-scale retail uses to support this residential development. Other amenities or importance include sale naris and io=ai schools. SCALE OF DEMAND At present, there is a significani demand for housing in the area. Signature Properties' interest in a 60-acre site in Area E is an indicator of private developer interest and iso the overall potential for residential cieveionment. With fey:, iarge sites available in Area D, J ! P:\74000s V40>""inch livrvrr.l\7401 im'_020fi0o.aor t172 CZ KCUOr! ivorii:Tcicnmona Rcacvcianmcn,;?Proicc:.,ircr Sruav tnruarii 2R)r developers are starting to loot"into tradltlonaliv industrial areas. in addition to the ,signature Properties development, the Cinr of Richmond is considering proposals nor residential development just outside the Study Area to the north of I.icnmond Parkway. While demand is strong, there are feasibility•limitations on development related to site clean-up, increasing land prices, the need to provide amenities, and the importance of price competitiveness relative to other.areas. Nevertheless, residential developmerit has the potential demand to generate a demand for over 200 acres of land in the next_'5 vears. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT In addition to private developer-driven housing,which will include below-market-rate units, there is an ongoing need for subsidized affordable housing in North Richmond. The area benefits from the activities of a number of nonprofit housing groups such as OCH and Eden Housing, as well as the CHDC. These groups have developed a number of affordable housing projects in North Richmond in recent vears. For example, the Heritage Community Senio:Apartments is a complex of 51 one-bedroom affordable rental units for low-income seniors with cm-site social services and is adjacent to a community_ health clinic and neighborhood commercial facilit%7. Nonprofit housing Croups are expected to continue to respond to the need for subsidized-housinh by working with the CHDC and the County RDA to finance such projects. These projects will also r'eouire additional land. and while most of them Krill likely be integrated into the existing residential neighborhood in Area D, if residential development spreads into other areas, affordable housing proiects could also occur there. 1740W� 140;inch\i:rnnr!51405i rc;_02U6Uo.ac: �'. LAND LSA POLIO l L:H_4NGE- A central element of this report is to provide background and direction regarding keT- land use police choices. Land use polio= decisions will have a direct impact on infrastructure requirements as well as infrastructure financing options. In the case of the North Richmond Project krea,ver, distinct land use directions present themselves . This chapter outlines three potential land use pohmr scenarios for further evaluation. Each of these scenarios represents a ''realistic" future given the characteristics of the area acid market conditions. It also describes some of the different implications of each of tri-e scenarios. Differences in infrastructure neecis are described in the next chapter. LAND USE POLICY SCENARIOS The type of development in North Richmond will depend on the mix of land use policies, market opportunities, development constraints, and interested developers . One key decision will be the land use policies of the County over the next 20 vears, in particular the land use permitted in the different subareas of North Richmond. To inform additional infrastructure and financing analysis, different land use scenario s should be evaluated and a preferred policy direction selected. Depending upon the choice of direction, subsequent land use policy actions (e.g,., General Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, etc.) will need to be pursued. For the purposes of this report.three potential land use scenarios were considered. The scenarios were developed to reflect the range of possible approaches and include the following: I. Maintain Existing General Plan. under this scenario,existing General Plan land use designations would be maintained. Area D would remain the only residential area in North Richmond with the other areas maintaining industrial land use designations. ?. Expand Residential Areas,Protect Some Industrial Areas. tinder this scenario, land use designations would be adjusted to accommodate additional residential development in Area C,though Areas A,E, E, and anv remainder of Area C would maintain their existin-, industrial land use designations and would not be converted to be residential uses. S. Market Accommodating Policv Changes. linden this scenario.land use designations would be altered, and requests to convert industrial land to residential or commercial land uses would be approved on a case-btu-case basis. ,�_ P:174000:%]405)rirh Iicconr,11405imr 020666m ivnrii:%tcirmonr AC(?CV0icr,7n)c77T ro!cci -t 7-c.-,Sru6V rcnrum)i -.20Gr SCENARIO EVALUATION The preferred land use scenario will depend on the particular goals and preferences of the County and the North Richmond residents and businesses. This section describes some of the key implications or and difrerences bemTeen the scenarios. These descriptions are intended to inform the poiicv discussion and are not comprehensi ve. The varving infrastructure needs and financing requirements by scenario are described in subsequent chapters of this report. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL The most immediate difference between the different scenarios is the "buildout" development permitted. The development potential will depend on a number of uncertain factors including the sale of any public land to private land owners, the types of businesses interested in the area, and the type and intensity of buildings constructed. For example, a portion of the land in Area B owned by the West County Wastewater District is going to be leased to private users and may eventually be sold to private developers. The casino proposal in Area A would also have a significant effect on the use of land as would decisions concerning the density of industrial or residential development. Berryman &- Henigar estimated the land avaiiable for private deveiopment. Potential levels of industrial and residential development were based on market-based residential densities and industrial floor-area-ratios. The land use scenarios do not contemplate changes in Area D, and so the existin(- residential neighborhood is not included in the estimates. Estimates of development potential are provided for Scenarios 1 and iinciuding a base, moderate, and aggressive scenario). The less policy-directed, MOTe:J market-based Scenario 3 makes estimates of development potential by location mori difficult as it provides complete fiexibilin- to adiust to market forces. As shown in Table 9, Berrvman d_ Henigar estimate that about 515 acres of the total 800 acres in Areas r.. B, C, and E could be available ror private development/redevelopment. Estimates of development potential are summarized below. • Scenario 1. under Scenario 1, General Plan designations remain as they are and land is developed and redeveloped with industrial construction. At buildout; the 514 acres of land that could be in private ownership would support 5.6 million square reet of industrial development. This represents about three and a hal; times the amount reasonable to assume for market capture in North Richmond through 2030. • Scenario ^a. Linde:Scenario _a, residential development is permitted in a portion o` 41Tea C. Linde-, Scenario mac. the baseline Scenario^ a total of 60 acres, likejV the Sipnarure I�rovcrttes development, is allowed to develop with non-industriai uses. J;' !`.'J4000;'J405inci,\iccnnriV4D.iin,f p-+Otibu.arr Table 9 Deveiopment Potential by Scenario North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area Stud': EPS#14051 Item Area A Area 6 Area C Area = Tota [ I otaI Acres 315 i 70 250 E5 BOD 1 Developable Acres 1Ki 86 210 514 PAP,Assumptions (rounded) 0.25 (all areas) Units/Acre Assumptions 8 (all areas) Scenario 1: Existing General Plan Industrial Acres 183 86 210 35 514 Residential Acres 0 0 0 0 0 Industrial Development(sq. ft.) 2,000.000 930.000 .290.000 380.000 5,600.000 Residential Development(units) 0 D 0 0 0 Scenario 2a: Portion of Area 0 (Baseline)(1) Industrial Acres 163 86 150 35 454 Residential Acres 0 0 60 0 60 Industrial Development(sq. ft.) 2,000.000 930.000 1.630,000 380.000 4.94D.000 Residential Development(units) 0 0 480 0 4B0 Scenario 2b: Portion of Area C(Moderate)(2) Industrial Acres 183 86 100 35 404 Residential Acres 0 0 11D D 110 Industrial Deveiooment isq. ft.) 2,000.000 930.000 1.090.000 360.000 4.400.000 Residential Development(units) 0 0 880 0 880 Scenario 2c: Portion of Area C(Aggressive) Industrial Acres' 183 86 D 3D4 Residential Acres D 0 210 = 0 - 210 . Industrial Develooment (sq. tt.) 2,000.000 930.000 0 380.000 x.310.000 Residential Development(units) 0 D 1680 0 1 •680 Scenario 3:Market-Driven(3) Industrial Acres Residential Acres inaustnal Deveiooment(sq. ft.) - — — — '.310.000 Residential Deveiooment (units) - - — — i .680 (11 Assumes or000sed Signature Progenies aevetooment is oermttted in Area C (21 Assumes resiaenual aevetooment Dermittea under Brookside Avenue to Area C i f31 Assumes resioennal oeveiooment is iDermitied to occur wherever oevetopers are interested Residenuai oemana is assumed to oe tar 210 acres within the next rwenty vear_ Sources.Berryman&Henioar.Economic&Pianninc Systems ln: cconomrc&Piannrnc 5vsiem_.rn_ 717200E _ P:1140005114051nchmoaeisN4051mad5.ri_ T177121 i<mnrm N07-tr,RZCI1)710711i RCC CV60T77MI-1i I)-a)ctt n roc Srud) rcnruar)i 2006 Linder this scenario,the buildout potential of the Stuciv Area is Ior about 4,G a-dillon square reet or industrial development and about 500 units or residential development Scenario 2b. Under Scenario 2b, residential development is permitted in a portion o Area C. under Scenario 2b, the moderate Scenario a total of 110 acres in Area C, likely most of the land up to Brookside Avenue, is re-designated to allow residential development. 'Under this scenario, the buildout potential of the Stud- Area is for about 4.4 million square feet of industrial development and about 900 units of - residential development. • Scenario 2c. Under Scenario 2c, residential development is permitted in Area C in entirety. Linder Scenario 2c, the more aggressive Scenario 2, a total of 210 acres in Area C is re-designated to allow residential development. Under this scenario, the buildout potential of the Stud= Area is about 3.3 million sauare feet and nearl-) 1,700 units of residential development. There is no industrial development in Area C under this scenario. • Scenario 3. Linder Scenario 3, residential development is allow=ed to occur wherever there is developer interest. Under this scenario, the location of new housing development is less certain,though it will likely start along Richmond Parkway and grow from there. Tinder this scenario, a total of 210 acres throughout the area is expected to be in residential development by 2030 or about 1.700 unit based on the market assessment. This leaves the potential for about 3.3 million square feet of industrial development. DEVELOPMENT TIMING Chapters III and IV outiined'the market opportunities to-:industrial and residential development, in particuiar: industrial. The level or demand for industrial development in North Richmond between 2005 and 2030 was estimated to vary beton=een 450,000 and 1.6 million square ieet of industrial development, or between 20;000 and 60,000 square feet per annum. The higher level or demand could be captured if the priman, barriers to industrial demand are addressed. • Residential. Developer interest currently indicates demand ror development of about 40 to 60 acres of land for residential development. By 2030, residential - cier=6 is eynected to be for 200 Or more acres. ror the purposes Of this analvsis, market demand ror residential development is assumed to support the development o;210 acres. f Jam- P:'J-0DW;`.)4 USirid+`.1•.rnrr!`.)-00iim7 U2UoGoaor r111a 2 1kc 10- 1vm ii7 i�icnmon, Kcncicimmlcr'T ro1c�:.Hr"^Muni: rCnrum'11 0&:.. These indications o; demand suggest the rolloi/rin- development unung Ior each oL the scenarios: • Scenario 1. Scenario 1 pro-rides industrial development capacin-well bevond the most optimistic projections of demand through 2030. Under this scenario, about 28 percent of the potentially cieveiopable/redevelop able areas will be redeveloped by 2030 under the optimistic projections. The remaining development would iikel 7 occur over the subsequent decades. • Scenario 2a. Under Scenario 2a, residential develonment of about 60 acres in.6S-Tea C would likely occur over the next five vears or so with industrial development occurring through timelip to 32 percent of industrial development capacit,would be absorbed by 2030 under the optimistic projections,likely the most marketabl-e sites, with the remaining land developing beyond this timerrame. • Scenario 2b. Under Scenario 2b,residential development of about 110 acres in Area C would likely occur over the next ten or so vears. Up to 36 percent of industri al development capacity would be absorbed by 2030 under the optimistic projections, leaving the remaining land for development at a future time. • Scenario 2c. Under Scenario 2c, residential development of about 210 acres in area C would likely occur over the next twenty five v_ ears. under the optimistic projections, close to 50 percent of the industrial development potential would also be absorbed by 2030. • Scenario 3. Under trds Scenario 3, residential development would occur through time, covering around 210 acres of the area. tinder the optimistic market proje ctions, close to 50 percent of the industrial development capacity could be absorbed. This does not, however, take account.o;the land use conflict,; and associated reduction in industrial development potential. LAND USE CONFLICTS Land use conflicts increase as the mix of uses expands. Residential development,in particular, can generate conflict; with-other uses,including,industrial and retail cievelor)ment if not carefully managed. As a result, "from a land use conflict perspective, Scenarl0 1 is the easiest to manage. Scenario 3, however, which would permjt residential development to occur wherever there is developer interest, would likei� strongly limit future industrial development adjacent to these deveiopments..CII-6V lie_ h t inaustriai development with a relatively loin trip generation would be compatibL. Scenarios 2a and 2'r woulci generate land use inte'=ration challenge. Dtlt in discretE, locations. The adiacencv of the potential residential areas to Richmond Paricwav ic7 the west and to the housing,in P rea D to the south makes the priman area of c'o ncerri the 3D ^:'.74000s',7405 i wh',iccvnrl\1405 im; 0?06(, nn, ;=mal Lcvor. 1Jorii� %uiirnond t�cdcvcionmeri Frotcct.tir�c Srudu rcbrunry T.2066 northern edge of the new resideritiai area. Policies and requirements governing the residential development along ttus edge, including landscaping, and buffers among other, would likeh7 be required to minimize the negative impact on future levels of industrial development. Scenario 2c would avoid some of these challenges, though the new residential development would still need to be appropriately integrated with some of the existing uses. FISCAL INMACTS Different development scenarios will have different impact; on the County's budget In addition to generating different levels of assessed value and hence tax increment to the County RDA,future developments will require expenditures to provide services and will generate additional revenues for the County. Residential development, in particular, will generate service costs to the County in the form of additional public safet`7,parks and maintenance, and public works costs. Some of these costs may be offset by the sales taxes, motor vehicle in-lieu fees and related property taxes, and fines and forfeiture revenues associated with new residential development. The net fiscal impact on the County's fund would require a more detailed fiscal impact anaAysis, though it is possible that the new residential development could result in a negative impact on the County's General Fund. The County and North Richmond residents will need to consider these effects against the higher levels of tax increment revenues that would be generated to the Redeveiopment Agencp bv residential development and the ava'lab'iin, of potential mitigating measures, such as Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD)payments for certain public services. r 4000:,iso %l. I1�rr�ysTru`TuP. � 17-EDS "N kT V= The inrrastructure need_-, analysis evaluates inrastructure needs in the Study Area in each of five subareas under each of the deveiopment scenarios. This information provides a technical basis for considering the feasibilin, of the scenarios and also targeting related implementation efforts. Lack of adeauate backbone inrasrructurc is one of the key obstacles to development in the North Richmond area. infrastructure problems include deteriorating roadways, inadequate water transmission and wastewater facilities, and inadeauate drainage facilities. in identifying the backboxle infrastructure that will be needed within the area, a range of previously published documents were reviewed. The current service providers were contacted and interviewed to document infrastructure needs. The backbone facilities include tho se improvements needed to support development of the area as a whole. Site related improvements needed to support development on a specific parcel are not inciudL_d in this analysis. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS BY SCENARIO infrastructure cost estimates are summarized in Table 10 and described below. I. An investment o f about 526.1 million is required to improve backbone infrastructure and support the redevelopment of the area with industrial uses. The existing infrastructure does not adeauateiv address development in the North Richmond study area. The "base" infrastructure investment required is 526.08 million and could support the development of the area Frith industrial uses. Tn�, majorin, of the infrastructure investment is required for roadways, about S15. million, with right of way acquisition, drainage, and the water distribution the priman,other investments required. �. Residential development will require additional infrastructure. Residential development will reaWre additional investments in infrastructure. Planning-leve] estimates of infrastructure required were developed based on tie-- unit infrastructure investment assumptions. The additional inrrastrucrure investment under Scenario 2a is 575.5 million. Scenario 2b, witn a moderate ievei o residential development, will require an investment of SIS._milhon: Scenario with the highest level of residential development,will, require an investment of 129.(i million. These improvement investments are in addition to the "base" level described above. As a result. Scenario 1 will require an investment of S26.1 nuliior;, Scenario 2a an investment of 531.6 mllllon, Scenario 26 an investment of I. rIL11110n, and Scenario Zc an investment o:Scd.l million. Scenario similar to Scenario 2c, is esnmated to require a total investment o;555.1 miHior!. 3LC P:114000s\1405 md,,irr W,1405 irtr; 02064o.ac: Tabie 10 Intrastructure Costs North Richmond Redeveiopment Project Area Study _PS#14051 (Cosi in Miliion$S! improvement Type Area A Area 5 Area C Area c Other. T otaI Base infrastructure(11 Backbone Roadways $1.94 $D.oc 59.9; $0.85 $.1.90 g?529 Riaht-of-Wav Acquisition S0,49 SMD, 53.81 SQ4B SMO 54.76 Backbone Water Distribution $0.82 $0.36 $0.94 $0.15 $0.00 $2.29 Backbone Wastewater Convevance $0.00 $0.00 $0.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.75 Backbone Drainacie $0.00 $0.00 52.97 $0.00 $0.00 52.97 Subtotal 53.25 $1.01 $18.44 $1.46 $1.90 $26.08 Additional(Residential) infrastructure (2) Scenario 1 $0.00 $0.00 50.00 $0.00 SD.DO $0.00 Scenario 2a $0.00 $0.00 55.52 $0.00 $0.00 $5.52 Scenario 2b $0.00 $0.00 $15.18 $0.00 $0.00 $15.16 Scenario 2-- $0.00 $0.00 528.98 $0.00 $0.00 526.98 Scenario 3 - - - - - 528.96 Total Infrastructure Costs Scenario 1 $3.25 $1.01 $16.44 531.4E $1.90 526.08 Scenario 2a S3?5 $1.01 523.96 $1.46 531.90 531.60 Scenario 2b $3.25 $1.01 S--3.E;2 $i.46 $1.90 541.26 Scenario 2 53.25 51.D i $47.42 $1.48 S1.90 555.00 Scenario - - - - 555.06 (11 1ne oase mtrastructure can support mdustrnal peveiooment inrouon the area (2)Additional infrastructure represents the additional infrastructure reouired to suoDon resioemial oeveiooment Cost estimates are very orenminary ano are Dased on Der unit oackDone costs of oetween 510.000 and$18.000 Der acre Sourc= Berrvman F,Henidar.Economic&Piannmq Svstems,Inz Economic E Prammnc Svstems.im 27,2006 G P:N405tncnveoortii4D5rmod3.rr.. nrr 2 Luo, North Rici nionr Reacveim7mcn' 1-roicct Ar.:r,,Jru61. rcnnlm•1 .20&- Tic reauired infrastructure investment varies conside-rabiv bii area. Area C has by far the greatest infrastructure investment need of S18.=miliion for the base infrastructure. Areas A and B, also significant in size, have much iower infrastructure needs. Area 7—has a high infrastructure requirement relative to its size. 4. Additional maintenance costs will be created if the required infrastructure improvements are completed. Based upon the current expenditures by the City of Richmond within the Hilltc>p Landscape Maintenance District, the costs of landscape maintenance for the roadways to be improved within the North Richmond Redevelopment Area are estimated to be 5275,000 annually. Roadway maintenance is typically 1 to 2 percent per year of construction costs, or between$150,000 and 5300,000 annually for&-te 515 million base investment in roadway. DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE PHASING The total cost of the base backbone infrastructure within the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area, as noted above, is estimated to be S26.08 million, inci-udinr all of the backbone infrastructure that would be constructed within the road wayslpubhc right of way. The estimated cost of the roadway improvements does not include the costs of outside lanes of the circulation roadways and related improvements. It is expected that the cost of those improvements will be the responsibilin, of the adjacent property owner. However, if individual property owners along the roadwa�� are not readv to develop m at the time the improvements veents are constructed• the related costs of the outside lanes may need to be financed along with the backbone improvement;. Areas within the Redevelopment Project Area where adeouate inrrastructure exists include parcels which front on Parr Boulevard as well as those parcels with fronta-e along Richmond Parkway. These areas generaliv have aaeouate Ovate; and sewer facilities to support new development. Any major development or redevelopment along. Parr Boulevard would reouire frontage improvement to the street. in addition, wiziie drainage is a significant issue in much of the Redevelopment Project Area,because these parcels are iocated to the north of man Pablo Creei , there are no drainage issues it this area as compared to other areas within the Recieveiopment Protect Area. The land areas within Area C nearest to F.ichmond Par}cwav are also generali considered to have good near-term development potential, if the infrastructure deficiencies are resoived. This includes providing adequate storm draina.ae facilitie_ and improved roadways. Some improvement in sewer collection and water faciliri es would aiso be reouired to support increased ieveis or development in this area. 40 P:\14000,'•740.irirh,imuorl17405 im1_02060—r.r r i7 1 I<ennr: Noriil Ricnmmld Rcacvcimmmrn' I'rmcci Aroc Smaw rcnruprli _.2066 increased levels of infrastructure improvements would b�_,needed in the areas further removed from Richmond Parkway and these areas are not likeiv to develop before those parcels near Richmond Parkway. '1 here are several parcels of land will not be available for new development or redevelopment within the foreseeable ruture. These "unavailable" land areas inciude the land included as part of the West Contra Count- Sanitary Landfill and land o-.,med by the West County Wastewater District, East Bay Municipal Utility District's North Richmond Water Reclamation Center and the West Count,transfer station. INFRASTRUCTURE PHASING AND COSTS The phasing of infrastructure improvements was reviewed and analyzed for the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area including a review of the circulation, drainage, water and wastewater facilities needed to support development within the area. The phasing of certain infrastructure improvements is dependent on the system itself. For example, drainage and wastewater systems generally require that downstream trunk facilities be constructed before the construction of upstream laterals to serve specific parcels. Street improvements can often be phased in based upon the timing of specific development project. The following identifies the major infrastructure facilities that will be required and the recommended phasing of those facilities. It should be noted that the phasing of the infrastructure facilities shown in Table 11 is intended oniy as a guideline based upon the assumption that development within the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area will generally occur from west to east with land near Richmond Parkway being the first to develop as well as the parcels along Parr Boulevard. BACK=BONE ROADW kY SYSTEM The Backbone Roadway Svstem consists of those roadways within the North Richrnond Redevelopment Project Area that are north of Wildcat Creel, and are based upon the backbone roadways identified in the "North Richmond Planned District Mar)". SDeci21C roadwav improvements needed to facilitate redevelopment include the following backbone roadwav improvements: • Brooi:side Drive-Widen to '-?-lane collector Irom Central Street to X11 Street • Brookside Drive-widen to 2-lane collector from 3rd Street to SFRP tracks includin realignment of roadwav to meet Geometric stanaaras . • Central Street-widen to 2-lane collector standards from Pitts,our� Avenue to Brookside Dnve I 1400v;'J405 mrh licrnn-!114051mt p2U6Gu.nr' i C; 0 I 0 0 0 I v 0 0 o O 0 0 0 C O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CDrn n o0 0 r7 a. - CC) cv o 0 0 N _ L r� D c G m C'! �`' — N e0469 f5 N f9 W 49i tF. C m D w O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O cn m 0 0 0 C in N ai o 0 0 0 ar r� c i- �p [O o 0 m In Uf -_ Uf N C N 0 m r3 69 _ bo� fi� r» 0 C w 69 o w ro w O O O O O O O O O N C u o 0 P Q, O C m m O; rD r N w 69 L to 69 N � 1 V) r) F m o r=. 0 O a: m •Op a: C N N N C f7 O Qr N G O C m _ m Vl al Y V) a1 o C) - V' '�Q m m coC O � ro UaJ N m = N o _ L O m = a C) D) ¢) OCC �? r ti m O m < — m < u m C) - _ Y - a,, m c, o: m v - cl a` z N u I N L N - I u a m m •"I o C.: m LL o^ _ L - > > O O > > O T < < E m _ .c .= .c ._ < G _ c > 2 Cl G 3 o v v t!i v v - 's a C.2 C, c - _ _ rnza? lccvnrr Nnrin Richmoml kcricvcicmmm' f roicci.`i rc,JruAr rcm•unrl: T.20Gr t Pittsburg Avenue—widen to -lane Collector from Garden Tract to 3,L'Street • Pittsburg Avenue—construct to 2-lane collector standards from 3rd Street to extension of 71h Street. • ?'h Street—construct to 21 lane collector standard from Pittsburg Avenue to realigned Brookside Drive • 3r" Street—widen to 2 lane collector from Wildcat Creek to Pittsburg Avenue • 3r' Street—*widen to 2 lane collector for Pittsburg Avenue including realignment to tie into Goodrick Road • Parr Boulevard—widen to 4 lane arterial standard from Richmond Parkway to SPRR tracks Based upon the expected levels of development within the project area, these improvements will provide sufficient capacity to allow the backbone road system to operate at a Level of Service of C or better (the General Plan-based service standard) based upon the projected trips that the various land uses will generate. Table 11 shows the estimated costs of the backbone roadways Dv roadway' segment. Figure 2 shows the location of each project. Included within the costs are costs of mass grading, surface improvements iinterior lanes), traffic signals and lighting. dn- utilities, sidewalks, landscaping and storm drainage improvements as needed for a functioning roadway. A 20 percent construction contingence was included. as have costs for eneineering and construction administration. The costs were developed by 'taking detailed construction costs estimates for similar tVrpes or roadways and using, them to estimate costs for the each roadway. Construction costs rot the proiects used were updated based upon the unit costs shown in Table 11. Right-of-way costs were based upon S12 per square foot 'for the additional right-of-way that will be required. The phasing of the road way.improvements within the North Richmond Redevelopment Proiect Area can be approached in several ways. One approach would be to construct all of the major street improvements to ultimate design sranciards in a series of construction phases corresponding With the assumed phasing of development. Following trus approae'h, roadway improvement would first be done on those roads Vdhich are served off of P.iciimond Parkway,•. As development progresses. the Improvements would be extended to match the pace or development. �inotner approach Would De t0 C07LStTL1Ct interim roadv,-av improvements lil a series of Construction vnases Wnerem partial improvements are constructed initlalh, while traffic- volumes are loy:. The final roadway.• is then constructed at a lateT date with the full num Der of lanes and related improvements as development occurs and traffic volumes z'? "'-.HDUCu'.140:inrii\kmorl',1405,mf D?O6Du.aa: mnZ icrnnr: ivnrih Ficnmmu� Prmc_:,7rc c,Srudi rcnrunn' -._Oiir warrant the full improvement. This approach is generally recommended since it provides Improved circulation and access to property at a minimum iniiiai cost. Tr ii_ aL)I)roach also provides flexibility in terms in the timing Of construction of other inrrastructure improvements. Table 12 shows the estimated rreliminan, costs for roadwav improvements related to three phases of development. The costs shown are for full roadwav improvements inciildinb gracing, paving, curbs, sidewalks, street lighting, traffic-signals, and other miscellaneous costs. It should be noted that if interim improvements were constructed for each phase the initial costs will be reduced, but the total ultimate cost, lnrill probably be hreater because of the extended time frame and the additional phases of constru coon that would be needed. Although not a part of this study but acknowledged to be a current issue is the nee d to provide an alternative route for trucks accessing the light industrial areas south of Wildcat Creek and along the eastern boundary of the project area. The Redevelopment Agency has obtained a CalTraris Planning Grant to stud),this issue and to identify the best alternatives for providing improved access for this area. W ITER DISTRIBUTION Water is under the jurisdiction of the East Bay Municipal Utility,District(EBMUD), which provides water to property within the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area. Based upon discussion with staff at EBMUD there is sufficient capacity to serve the area;however, upgraded water lines will be required to be installed within the rnaior backbone roadways. Several of the major water distribution improvements needed to serve the area include: • Replacement or existing 8" waterline with a new 12" waterline in Parr Avenue rrom Garden Tract to 3°I, Avenue • Replacement o, existing 8" waterline with a new L" waterline in Pittsburg from Garden Tract to Central and a nev\, 1 waterline from Central to Avenue and extent to tie in with Brookside Drive • Replacement of existing 8" waterline in Central Ave between Pittsburt,to Brookside Drive • Rer)lacement of 12" waterline in realigned section.of Goodrich Avenue • The costs of the Backbone Water Distribution facilities are estimated to be "?G million based upon an average of S280[iinear foot for design, construction, project management and contingency. The EBlvFJD collets a System CapaciTv Charge (SCC) tot all new development io cove the cost,of the backbone infrastructure inciudirig transmission mains, pumping-facilities and storage reservoirs. If the backbone water improvements are constructed 4.4 n:\14000s\1405 ind,pito \1405t,'_02060—o' N v a D 0 P_ h Qt O 2 I O( O I O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N I O I O O O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 co O O tf) CD O O N I-I 00 t!•1 P C1 1- co CD N I- M O LD N LI-) n m m CT I^ m M M - N M I M M 1- o0 M I- M COI 69 64 69 co - 1� 64 63 69 69 ^ v9 C r» 414 L in o 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U CD [D N to m G) Ln r-- m - mm - oIm LD N IO I- CO O LD I- - CO CD I- m O M Ln C' N Lb CT f- (DM M N - D v9 v) CV - 69 69 69 ^ N N to V 69 69 64 6-3 64 69 r us m w N W DD O O CD Cr) CD O CD Co CD M C CD CD LD I- I- I- CD CD Co I I- I- m z CD O O CO CD CD CO CO DD CD CD oNi C' !t n LO LC) 'T C V LD Lr) - R _m o > U c c U D _„_ N y D LU N d e� C] CDN N � > fU liJ N •'- N C (D r v, > _ U O to U) I Q U Cl) a)c u _ 1 N . m 'D " D 5 L m '> Li j .- fn O Ef) '"� O M D Ln O M CD [D O O O p Y .D Y D O m = N a _ O pI pD (�I = a m In E CU v ❑7 ctrl m L EDD m ° a" m to o x o m m v Y .D c;5 Q Cl o Q O L Q m ti CD C U C = Ir 2 a) ti -nT m Cn U) U C, YD = LOtn m o c > I N _ C) (ll N vD D I a) (1) D in L7 _ _ U ^ CD 0I T > > G > (L) - U < Q U R.. > N F II IIY (U QI G u ° _ _ tC o: G I G _°I _O I -_.I _I I �` I r I c` �. ° a o ILTIIOLTIIUILI �- I�io-. IL I .G I c: r, v u LL, Fara Z 1CCD0r': North Richrnonri kcncvci(mmc7-,f Prnrect Arm c,5nrnr: r cnrun'r: -,'00c M7 prODerty owners in order to allow geyeioument to occur ir. a timer' manner, it would be advisable to request credit or reimbursement rrorr. EB= as SCC fees are collected in the future. Other off-site and on-site improvements will be needed to serve specific parcels ba_;ed . upon specific development pians. These improvements would generally be the responsibility of individual property owners. WASTEWATER CONVEYANCE Wastewater collection and treatment is provided to propertjv within the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area bS, the West Contra Costa County Sanitation District and the West County Wastewater District. Based upon discussions with a-ency staff,no major off-site improvements are needed to serve the area. However,the existing sewer mains in Goodrick Ave would need to be relocated as part of the realigned section. A new sewer main would also be needed in the extension of Pittsburg Avenue to the Brookside Drive tie-in. It is expected that these lines would'be constructed in easement,within the new limits of the new richt-of-way. The estimated costs.for these realigned sections are estimated at S0.75 million. DRAINAGE FACILITIES infrastructure for the collection and convevance of storm drainage is largely absent from the study area and represents the most serious inrrastructure denciencv within Area C in particular and is within the 100-vear hood zone. Storm water is currently collected in a series of drainage ditches and creeks and discharged into Wildcat Creel:. There have been a series of proiects over the years to restore Wildcat Creel:and reduce floodirt-in the area. About a decade ago the Coms of Engineers collaborated with local groups on a fiood control and restoration project on lower Wildcat Creel:near Richmond Parkway. There is a current project to restore lower Wildcat Creel:near Verde Eiementan,School. The Cin, of Richmond and Contra Costa Count,Redevelopment Agencv are worldn,-to determine a drainage strate,v for the Northernportion of North Richmond's Industrial land. In order to provide adequate storm drainage facilities for the stud, area. a series of surface drainage improvements will be needed to capture runoff rrom streets, parkingistorage areas and other site run-off. These facilities will need to be capabie of capturing runoff from a storm with a 10-year return period. Storm water,will need to be' collected in a detention basis located within the project area to provide temporan. storage and then drained to existing drainage A�ays (Wildcat Creel: or San Pablo Creek). A more detailed anaivsis of drainage reouirements Aril] be needed to adeauatei,size 4D P:\r40DOs'J 405',rhh',hro C,1405M 020606—: Y i1ZC� ICCD(7r' fdnrir Ja CI7171 D7Bi 1\T'Q Ci CI17r71 it Cl'..' i•ro:ri ri ror,jtitC71: rcorurrrl ?OG; racilities and to ensure that the reouirements o the NPDES permit are met inciudirng compliance with identified best management practices related_to.ensuring that the Ovate- ouality of the storm runoff does not adversely impact the natural waterways. Based upon an initial reviews of the project area, it is estimated that a five-to sever(-acre site will be reauired for the construction of a detention facility/ for storm water runoff. This would require the purchase of a site for the construction of the facilin7. in addition major collection lines would need to be installed to collect storm runoff and convey it to the detention facility site. Because of the flat topography of the area,it is likely that pumping facilities would need to be constructed as part of the project. Treatment of run-off would most likely be required if retention basins are not used. The likely estimated costs are as shown below: • Site Acquisition S1,680,000 • Detention Faciliq, $ 475,000 • Pumping Station(s) S 350,000 • Major convevance $ 460,000 • Total Estimated Costs S2,965,000 The costs for engineering, construction contingencies and project administration are included in the above estimates. Facilities could be constructed in phases to match the pace of development. However, a drainage master plan should be prepared for the area to establish the necessary grade and eievation criteria and to establish specific disci-►arge requirements. ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Because of the continuing demand for housing within the West Count, area as described above, there is continuing interest to develop a portion of this area for housing,. For example,Signature Properties has submitted a request for a General Pian Amendment that allows residential development for a 60-acre site within Area C. Tris area is directiv adjacent to the KE Homes project. If residential development were to be allowed in at least a portion of this area, market demand would be for small single- family detached development with lot densities of 8 to 121 units per acre. Based upon experience with similar projects and the existing infrastructure within the area, it is estimated that the costs of providing backbone inrrastructure for this densin,.of residential development would be in the range of$85,000 to 5100,000..pe7 acre based unon a development size of 40 to 60 acres with a density of S to L units neT acre. Tris would eauate to 510,000 to S12,000 per unit for backbone inirastructure within the development. P 740W,V405mch Ucron*i',1405i-f-020666..: inrL i 1.uvor( )vrrii:rcfcmm�n,�kcdcvcirnmicr,' i-roicc,tircn jrunv rcnrunry 2001 W-nile specific sights have not been evaivated as part o this study. the potential for- residential ogresidential development within Area C appears to exist. in looking at i=astructu=-e needs and costs associated with residential development, the area south or Brooksi cie Drive was evaivated to identify the potential costs of infrastructure that would be needed. If triis larger area were allowed to develop for residential uses, the costs per unit based upon a density of 8 to 12) units per acre would likely increase to $16,000 to 518,000 per unit based upon the need to provide enhanced levels of landscaping and open-space within the area. INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE COSTS The development of a range of new infrastructure in North Richmond will bring iA ith it additional maintenance costs. The maintenance of this new infrastructure will be integrated into the established processes of the relevant service providers, some of which will recoup the additional maintenance costs through user fees. Some of tnE-- new infrastructure, such as public roads and landscaping, will result in net additional maintenance costs. The costs of road and landscape maintenance will vary depending on their configuration and level of maintenance service selected. For example,based upon the current expenditures by the City of Richmond within the Hilltop Landscape Maintenance District, the costs of landscape maintenance for the roadways to be improved within the North Richmond Redevelopment Area are estimated to be S2i�,000 annually. Similarly, roadway maintenance is typically 1 to ?percent per year of construction costs,or between 5150,000 and 5300,000 annually for the proposed SIS Million base investment in roadways. There are various financing, options ror maintenance costs a,,; discussed in the next chapter. 4i 14UWs',74U3inri\ tnnrf l74U57 U7U6Uonr \'Ii. FI1\4NCING CONSIDERATIONS AND NExT STEPS Fon a#ng.and_developing infrastructure will plav a.critical role in increasing the competitiveness of the North Richmond area in capturing new jobs and businesses. The Cbuntv has access to a number of financing sources and mechanisms; each of which must be carefully considered. The variability of infrastructure costs and the pace of development by area and by scenario will have significant effects on financing nee cis and availability. Financial feasibihn, considerations and potential financing options are discussed belo�X>: FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS The relationship of the real estate value added and the related cost of infrastructure improvements is key to determining the feasibility and practicality of redevelopment, rezoning and related investment decisions. The variability of infrastructure costs by area results in significantly different cost burdens and feasibility challenges by area (see Tables 13 to 17). As shown, Area C will require land values of over S20 per developable land square root to support the infrastructure required, unless significant public funding is available. under current market conditions, this land value cannot be supported by industrial development, but likely canbe supported by residential development. As a result, the pace of Area C redevelopment will be closely tied to land use police decisions. Areas A and B,however, have significantiy lower cost burdens and industrial development likely will be able to earn' a large proportion of their area infrastructure costs. ONE-TIME DEVELOPEF, CONTRIBUTIONS Developer, are often required to contribute directly towards the financing on the I ackbone infrastructure reauired to serve their project as well as that or the broader area. As recognized above, however, the cost burden that can be placed on new development is limited by the market value of the development. The two primary mechanisms for direct developer contributions include Developer Agreements(DAs) and development impact fees, as described below. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS For large developments, requiring General Pian amendments and other discretionary actions. DAs are often executed between the public entlt<' and the developer w'ru'cn specinv the precise financial contributions or infrastructure construction obiigations of the developer. in North Richmond, tills type of approach maybe most suitable t07 residential deveiopmentS. For example, residential deveiopers could be required to pay for tyle backbone infrastructure costs that sei"ve their projects. Furtnermore, based on the preliminary estimates of Berrvman L HeniRar, a EE:3 million payment may be '1Q !"•.14D>U.•\740iir¢iill�torrrt'.7465 imf 0?UhLo.ar. N Vl b G h O p OI Cn 1OI C LD D C) o Lr,) o o OI O MI c CD col Lr� � c R Lr) c r; W o oio CV 1,..; O O O 61- 691 6S 6f1 69i 69 T U ^ O Cb O CD !A vl cn !7 �. O CP O p N - N NI Lo 69 691 t6 p G 0 L 0 V C CD o O OI O t` OI CD CP !�I CD t7� N O O O MI C CD OI U) 1� IC M O O 011 O _ U N 6 CD ODI CD 9 EA1 69 69 6�69 . N CD ODl LC') N to 69111 to O m tr0 1-- co!c M 1-1 to i N CD C 0 0 O OI O ^ Cpl co M C'7 I-. N CO LC) V' N m CD0 CD. l_ _I � _ N I� O OI O 69, 691 tFi 69 69{to T U p co j (D 69 fn ON �y CD Nto65 O V C' CD 0 o of o i- to ^ N NIC N N 0 O OI O ^ NI c Q, CDI LD 1- tD to C N co 0 0 0 61- N OI cri O O OI O 69 691 696-i 691 tfi U N N co CINI O Cn 0 H4 In m _ No7 cli N 691 Ch N 69 b9 T O O - CD CDO 691 O 1^ of - O - tI C R ^ N O O Oi- C OIC N 3t O7 N CD O O 69 tA1 64 tR tPA b' fA U Il O O 69 r\ CL W N N N a - 6S tri L U a, < M OJ m oLo � a` L' o C m >✓ r 1 > - - In - fn - Lu n tr _o o` a, _ Q} a m > C y J J C, ` C : pL) c: Q) U v C N N T, R m Qi = "' N e' ' d D v '[<, O v r Z p r p r o U Z - L < J C < J = M. < U ELI < U < C I Jrl b 0 N 0 w a 0 c - u N U C _ N O I L •i N co N m CD 691 CD - -17 O PIP - CD U') I� I� O OO - =7 - m d C -7 fl, tflf tfi tfi 6-A t» to U OJ ^ N N Cn- CT CD Cn Cn M ro M tR tf3 ID CD m pl M CT, OI CA I- OI r-- to •� N m N M CD CD CD CD Q O1 C C'7 CD OII C) 6461,6, t{i 691 tH !fr U co CD N N U) O O Cn QS (V M s 69 69 0 < M co O r� M OI M C7) OI m C O C N co N Ln N CD 69i CD C J C Ln O U) CD Co I- O OI O - O - C G 1� r. tfr v9li to 6191 6Si 69 N Cn Q) tf, M (S- N r � 69 69 M co N co f''; OI C'7 (7i CT C OIC co O N N CA CC to-)I CD C. ti CD r� I� O O O - 691 Lr # d CD f`7 I� 1� 691 69fn b9 EE6`AA3111 tFi tH U OD N N C/) O"i N (T CJS LU N lfi 65 T `u c m N d C d CG fL fC7 N N - R rn d 4> ti C a, m v (D J (D (D F v L C p U C C P C ti a, m C) v, cr) N Uj N o ID O ID _o F c m a - o = a o `o _ in v U = L < J C < J = M< r U m < U M, < v C i , J,' N Ci N O C_ h m 5 0 C U N O O O O O o U ED r, —. mm OI mco . N co r C I` 1� 691 1� M OI fl-,CD c IC p l 61 D O OI O N a O — N N 69 691 6969, 69f 69V4 U M m M N U) M t6 69 ° IDCD M '— D m OI m CD OI CD CA OI m O O Q. (`'J m 691'` M OI M m O a) O J D o Oj O O OI a) O p N 69 69{69 69 EH1 69 69 U MN M M U) 1- M M — 69 69 C) Q CD M m OI m CD OI CD N O Q N O '` 69 I- M O M — C� CD M '� oo�o = o - m m O C� N 64 e031 65 69 69i 69 u9 CN U M m M M M — b9 69 tL ° — UD C,.) C (P m OI m CD OI CD CD 01 CD N m O � O N O I— 6911- M OI M N JII N co v ti p p 1— p mCD CD 6�1 691 69 _ 69 691 69 1A N N pM (h (LI M 6S 69 T Z L] � O O M a) — D c _ a o o < a = ti m m v C a>i to a J a J v, a _ o ti v a; N _ a1 = cmo. a7 = fG CG — m = ❑ . m CG IG _ C6 m t: [0 — O.J e s ` a = p a = , ° ° m o L) m o m z — o m -0 a, �m U Z G < J C Q J G — Q U < U G1 L" u G Q H 41 D D C U N .t h G G G 0 C) V 0 0 G O m 01 CC, i N G f=l t6 '� CV ^ LC� tD r N CD N co O m!9 N C) LP N [I- VH69 tfr 6 ti 63 N ICOI O U r N CRl ^ 07 C7D�co (T N "C• b9 �69 CD p (fl t0 m OI m O tot CD ` N 00 CCD 7 0 C)I UJ (D'1� O C, N i�5 m 01 CYC N 0 CD 6} 69 6-f91 6 69 U LO N C7 m UJ 'c t3, O _ ^ try 69 691 4fi m OI m O OI O m 1-1 ul C O 6 CD O1 to ^ UDI O ^)N tY� ti N CD N CO OIM N CD 01 to6°f tfli 69 b4 b91!Fr +6R U V G N NI! - CSs LO;'C — 691 N tt Ki Lr) c O tc, m .to trf-1) "� lZ N COD {� 6-A[} �J UJ CV 01 CV ate- OI�� N 1`- CD CC` 64 691 69 69 691 69 N U) U N N d U) Q, N V cr) ( ` ti sn ` C) a CD e a t> o V) u CV N o: c5 N a - — .Q i u •^ C = u_ O` a a' U y p t w U; n > >21 v, c ziCU ft m U7 U o m CO o o U �� u; v ti O G a O C L, `R, c• = G C. v � G C. r U Z _ C < J C < J CG < U LL C U L. < C LO G VJ C a _J C 1, l7 O R G U V tt) CD O OI O Lr) OI to plI- tl- N MLO � 691 C) I- OI 1- L!') OI t!') O JI O - OI- C Q .� O m Ki tfli 69 649 tfji 69 VR M M t% N - - r LO I 64 Ell O mN N O OI O to OI t1) Cl) OI O C MCD 691 a) 1� O I� 0 0 0 M Q) � Lr' O OI O N OI N tD Q M M co 69 (fli 6> 64 691 69 69 41 M M U) Ir L - r b4 69 C) < tf) (D Q) O OI O LD OI LO to O I tf) M Q) tAI m f- OI 1- M =) M r W co ER 69I to 69 fAI fA 4A, a7 M M u - - 69 69 U') O r LC (D O 0 01 0 CD OI(D CD OI CD O O L fn c I- O 691 Q) O OI O 1- OI I- C v Lr)_ tt' of-= m o m' —_ W lX) (fr tA1 ffi 6S tfN tf.- d O O 69 U) V N O CD LL1 (ia 69 a U Q) OJ O G M M U C N VD d O N C) Z _ m O ID LL- U,W � �) _ a a (0 ti Ov c„ > n (n = fn W to d a) N N J a+ J tr a) ❑ U C G C a C > C O d N o. 77 a ID v, U, — y o ID o ID o a m u ti O O O r O v �. _ c O r D m = c t171Rt 1CCV OT: �V Or[li rV 071717011 i1 ICC(7C7)Cl017171 0 7 7; /'1'07CCi r-1 rC f. JUlal% rcvruarl ZUGr associated witn the residential develovment under Scenario 2a, a S15.2 million pa-,rrnerit under Scenario 2b, and a S29.0 million pavment under Scenario 2c. in some cases, as could occur in Scenarios 2a, 2b, and 2c.,early developers could be required to oversize infrastructure capacinl and be reimbursedlater bi, new development utiiizing this capacin7 or by public contributions. This might be one way to speed up infrastructure development in Area C if Scenario 2a,2b, or 2c were considered. Any Indian Casino would be subject to a compact with the State, which mai•provide an opportunity- to negotiate financial contributions. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES Development impact fees are limited to infrastructure associated with new development. In this case, the distinction between existing and new development is blurred as much of the North Richmond Study Area could be redeveloped. If a fee program were developed, this distinction would need to be carefully evaluated. COST BURDEN CONISIDERATIONS The imposition of costs on developers must be considered against both the need for private sector financing and the ability of the new development to bear the costs. For example, it is possible that in the early stages of additional industrial development, decisions may be made to hmt.charges on new development to support and"encourage new development of this nature. If development costs are too high, the rate of development in North Richmond will be lowered. in time, as the area develops more and its competitiveness increases, greater burdens could be placed on industrial development. ONGOING DENTELOPMENT CHARGES Two mechanisms where property owners may pay ongoing charges or assessments are common methods for supporting infrastructure development, including Melio-Roos Commurun,Facilities Districts and Benefit Assessment Districts/Landscape and Lighting Districts. in these cases landowners or property owners vote to impose an ongoing special tax, or assessment on themselves that is then used either to support bond issuances for capital improvements o;to support capital and certain maintenance expenses on a vav-a,-you-go basis. Mello-Roos Community Faciiin- Districts and the associated special taxes can fund infrastructure and maintenance costs. Thee are a more flexible hnancin, too] than assessment dlsrncts and are less comple,,to estabhsn and adminlster. Thev cannot, novlevei, be used to pay Tor road maintenance, but can fund landscape maintenance. ., .'")4002a 7405 i nrh'.iuronr;',1405irr,.' O:UfiOu.aa: Y1712 L KCDOr.' Norin Ri blMD77t Rcdcucianmcll:' Ironc; Ar=,Sru6v Fccrunnr -.20&G A benefit assessment district approach is currentiv being used by the North Shore Business Park in the Cirn of Hercules, where an assessment district was established to support a bond issuance for capital improvements. Assessment districts are also commonl}r used to pay for median maintenance and lighting requirements. While these costs ('assessment and special taxes)are paid ov the property owner, A-hich in some cases is not the same as the developer, the imposition of a special tax-or an assessment will t micalltr reduce the lease rate or sales price occupants are willing to pay, As a result, it is effectively a different form of charge on development that needs to be considered in coniunction with other direct deveiotament charges and overall cost - burden issues. This tool has the advantage Of being able to pay for both capital and some maintenance expenses. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING The North Richmond area is a Redevelopment Area. f-s a result,a significant proportion of the propert, tax generated goes directiv to the Counts, RDA for both infrastructure improvements in support of redevelopment as well as for affordable housing. In addition to any existing tax increment revenues that may be available for investment,new development in the RDA will generate additional revenues. under existing market conditions, iand developed with market-rate residential development will generate significantly higher tax increment revenues than land generated with industrial development. Some of these revenues could be used to support the cost of infrastructure required to increase the rate of industrial development in North Richmond. Tax increment revenues will likely be the most significant source of public sector financing for inrrastructure improvements. Given the significant existing inrrastru ciure deficit and the limitations on funding from private deveiopers and property owners,.the County may need to allocate significant tax increment revenues towards infrastructure development OTHER FUNDING SOURCES There is a number o;other funding sources, including local, State and federal `*rants, that: may be availabie for additional studies as well as inrrastrueture investment=. Mos'.. Of these grants are competitive and provide onjy a limited level of rending. North Fuchmond will have a good chance of obtaining grant funds and should continue to compete for such funds, recognizing that they are likely to Oniy cover a small proportion of the Overall cosi. J C V.,14000,\7405 i nd.l hrnnr1 74 05)1 020666—: ,,=nza? iccunr` Nn•ti: R cnmonc'Rc6caeim7mc7::' i�rmccf Arcs Scuai, rchruar7/ -.200: Currentis', some of.the funds that may be available to the North Richmond Redevelopment Project Area include the Communitv Development Block Grant (CDBG), Measure.1 (formerly Measure C), Metropolitan Transportation Commission Smart Growth/Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Capital and Planning Program, and/or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfields Grant. A� shown in Table 16, these grants could be used to fund inrrastructure improvement projects as well as assess brownfields in the Project Area. in addition, the Counts- has included irnits federal legislative platform an appropriation of S1 million of federal funds to further the North Richmond infrastructure program. J l:'.740DLrs'.74Giiridr\i�rvnrl'.74DSim1 D?U6Un.nr' t O 6f A �_ .9 '• D - ._ !' p D O mr...- N U U ?� r N a R F lG ti'9 •- N t17 y o u . _ > G td > P � U d 7 F N �61 y'O F N N'D � � [ ��, .N N 6 N A y D - N•(� N N Lt. ✓ls N O T' O 'P O Y' ` i9 F" 'P 9 N A SY O ..0 U .d p N .H N U U y 4 N N .- ,p N r of d � t" O o u�•>-EuuB onacv+ um Goo '6 yomm7Fp.Ma,.v a,N m U o�=•� D �'� o.�a'�s= " F m'v a N a o m u �.» c ? `=N - d m u o ' u 11Q m u : m@ G o m u 9 mEoC = E dD oo ' v, � o No mL - ' � 4m ' aLo u m o u ado . °� NUa -= � m o•� v ° .� o@o N �� Nc u o; `°-' ou. �,s am m = " gym roc Nc, m L"6 -v S - ` O..j"in U O VT N U 7 d Y, O ff ~ t• � m 7 0u ti U D P O N IK O Nt tD W O LL'1C F: N ylp to W N1m h 4 t4 i- is m F 9 V� '• N V N p d O G (9 Y O O L 1 ti O� D p O � ' J N � 4 G T r i J 1 � _ d 11 ` ` L F D v �7 p E ? �C •�N - A LL _ v E G L U@ 7 N 61 - _ Nm O p@ Q U fCi G N@ N N U C U L (GfaG in @ N C N > ° W _. Cio O .D j CO @ 7 G N C ? O, O N y @ @ N D'O V Ot N GO•� OO O�aj ^ d @ U @ N LL N C C v D O.C Dn v@ m C C@ W V@v- ` @gEw = Uc = �r - mm=~—ave _ m � = m< < a,o m � _ ^ g m -n N U "i DI H@ `p N p .d G N p m C '10 = N L� p a D'W 0. P C' O C P n m - (p C _ O p 7 C @ D•N p_ al 03 ° @' U Oa @ OD '> N @ > O N m d 7 j _ �p Ol y W T -N d N O@@ v N} D U Ot= U '� m � ° v v= m a u 3 > m C ¢ N o a, � � � o w �y r= o cL u D`a rn N m m o =° ou_ v L m U O _ 3 > v.v U m m � m m 1° o ? 3 °°' L° y@ p ai v D v - o U m 6 P D o m EL)— @- G >+ o. _ _ p. m = @ G G H a'in '= N N; h v o N d N N. v O,O@ O n 7�p C p N p = N D O @ fp D N _ N'D= W C N r N m@ O N N al C - v al F m " O V N — D>p a1 O C y W — N@ ao m D..m` mr 'm a7 c.m E[` >� P oP m aN Nm c a —n°i m ^' ° r m c v y Q1v^ v W u m m m m = Lr; 9 _ @ v D v c c `m n a a m m ti n a u c =d o m r ri `m v.o@ D m> m m m 0 0 G o 0 � o 0 1E m p K m, N I m m e5 LL O C a;- O N a I - N � v v @ u - Ct o � _ `a, o n v b - � b � v I o I - o U NO N U (n < @ - L = g W - `v O D J L 7 � OJ I d N o c N w o � C D V) o ti ti 3 0 v cuLL � � I ✓ a IL G 3 C. -wF1 2 �,i n n"r ii:n:'•�'Ch1•�r.r.m- iners.l Eatme Eronomu! ne�-coml Econamk; Pub l,c FLn ncc innd Usc Polar. APPENDIx A STAKEHOLDER INTTERVIIEWS 1_ KEHOLDER 1NTT-7MTIE1A1z In October 2004, -P-5 conducted interviews with stakeholders and uropert�7 owner- in North Richmond. The stakeholders that participated were members of the North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council (NRMAC), and included Joseph Barrett, D z. Henn Clark, Lee Tones, and Toe Wallace. The property owners included.Joshua G�--nse- of Richmond Development Company, LLC, and Marvin Mendelsohn of Action Metal Recvcunc,. NORTH RICHMOND MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COUNCIL MEMBERS Members of the NRMAC were asked to discuss their assessment of the key development opportunities and constraints of the North Richmond area, new or proposed business and development activity in North Richmond, the types of businesses/uses they are interested in attracting to North Richmond, and the types of businesses that would be suitable to employ North Richmond residents. Their responses were numerous,but most of the stakeholders stated that the area is in need of a gas station, grocer store, convenience stores,and laundromats, and lacks job training programs and opportunities for jobs in construction,carpentrS,, and plumbing for residents with little education. The stakeholders would like for North Richmond to receive more services such as increased public transportation access, after-school programs for school-age children, and affordable child care programs for single parents. They would like to-new businesses to be light industrial uses,provide on-the-iob-training, and be willing tc) forgive previous transgressions of job applicants such as criminal histories and prior substance abuse. Thev would also like for the Counn to enrorce the First Source Hiring agreements with employers to hire more members from the communin. NORTH RICHMOND PROPERTY OWNERS Property cnvner were asked to discuss their assessment of the key development opportunities and constraints of the North Richmond area, the feasibility and potential development timetable of the proposed uses in North Richmond., new o-proposed business and development activit, in North Richmond, recent interest expressed developersibrokers in vacant buildings audio-land in North Richmond, competitive areas or properties in the region, existing uses and an assessment of mrrastruCture adequacy, the types of businessesiuses they are interested in at,acting to North Richmond, and the types o.-businesses that would De suitable to employ North Richmond residents. The property; owners exulained that the negative sn,ma_or crime and iliegai d=in and probiems with drainage in North Richmond have contributed the area's underuti11Zaiion. Che owner, who is also an industrial developer, stated that most — °.174000317405 i ride\F,w,I t 1405 7 r,: 02066. c: rniai Rcroor Norih Ricnmond Rcncr.'eionmcr; Pro=`Arcr 5runrr i cbr•unrii 7,200r industrial Dusinesses would rattler locate In tale CIn' of Hercules:however, the lana in North Richmond is cheaper than land in Hercules, and Hercuies has ainiost reached buildout. These owners would like for an assessment district such as a Mello-Roos District to be established, the.drainage and flooding issues addressed with a concrete culvert, and new industrial uses to be addressed with the construction or some indusmal condominiums in the range of 2,000 to 5.000 square feet for incubator, warehouse, and distribution space. The property,owners recognize that there is an available source of labor in the North Richmond area, but know,that neva businesses do not typically honor the First Source Hiring agreements with the Countv. Finally-, they added that most industrial developers will not build on speculation in North Richmond due to the expensive cost of development, given that 20 percent of building, costs can be fees alone. They would like for the County to clean up most of the vacant sites before future development, as most of the land in North Richmond is considered to need environmental cleanup resulting from hazardous uses in the earl), 2900s. . . .':'•.N OW,%74G3 m,: 1405,m! 02o60d.ur. ^��� r � . 11 / I i n m � o a o O o❑ 1 t ' f 1I . IA �I # ; 1 CONJT O WeTPear P i LOI 0 �t I n �T. 1rLOT P I {' Iy II etxacr a �I�t `kkfjp31 Com\ -/ -e'UNT z QI J 'eTPaaT LOT ooll M Cn X11 r� © ®� G�� ®, N 1:CMT[ L_._( UJItIT I i �,� „ .. .•w O o /A p� CDVV��7, �J z - .. .: .. —eTe eTPaeTJ .� OI O - LOT s eTPeFr o u+Pry kF,—j- 1 ,O---7 v_ CONK N d II N `• ILJ�' aTNEEi I LOT L x 11 z I LOt 1 ' ld I ,I etP"I P 7.11 OT. CONIT Y. ---� 1 D Q aTPEJ?T e �' 1 ,.' y I I' aTP6T O aetlVAlB eTPean I © I ©I ;o J II 1 k' I d I &ADNOO r ,'NIIDNe 1 j CONRC 0 'M�?321 WiB8t-�_ � .• NB8501J][_j129 -.. _ .. 1 ��QAQ� I I PM mq5 9 X 2$C,^.e^r� �s "y't`�Z � v ZT"29Fp it a manJa+c nurKlelr rA gl CA a o;ui -rte`}.y,3 u, 'i So a 'S g 6 r,5 S m A �F4n ^ a m X3 ' 80 `tullo $2 a� —ISI— i.",I-`�+ ' �. 'r. �;�1!•;. } t 41 11 �' t - �� l�i 6y5gN <_�r��'E �! ?i•I'j ��Ij i1�� ML t��t 'I I�I I•��I `�I I : t _ 5 � i' Ili I•.�,; RI �dl�l : n Z W - � � :�+. ._ .. i SII t III i• I�i !II'f lr�. - :. , _ I 11 �,'. .1 •� 9> W •f I .,. .__ ,' ` 11�i III 11 I III rjj co r jl mc. roOn W :�I r I , I� I'I Ili I• ?II i' Z � -. - 111 4 D0 i 'tl 1.3ii I �i �!I! M1 1i48. : � i� ;! � ���• �I�Y i '!!' {�, III :I i III .I�I• IYIt : m III I N= I { tiaN ; IIy } : I U . - �s �"'" -F;' .mac '� ..1` �'=•. aa, MEN /J W742.9'__ IXJ9 -.-_---- v•!. p__ >O ! �_EI'd-IL'._ —_ ___'______`'�— _ h88'SO _ _-_ 1 - _- _ o — <, PIMBURG'AVENUE __ 1 I___._�, ,• 'I I ! i�l 1.. � � I N T-1 - -i—l—ri. - - - 51 - -It - .t. � - 1 - - 1 t - --- -- - - - -- ---I-- -- - "g I a !rlj° f f'f £II £ E yli 6 g 1 r r € €'€ € € f ! [ :. } € [ ' tl'i € it 1 € i € r!'t it 3i9 91! S F137 ' f F € `Ikk' [ , t g [ g r [ r € € [ 1 1 1 I'� I 1 t t jI i I I I r 1 t 14 s ( r [ €!# I I ? r ; t r l r l : 1i � _ , Il ; -�. i1 . 13tt I ,IS � � 3rdd � €!� d 5I � � % ( ! I• � 3a ( ,, ]'-t � ( � `� � � # � t � � � � � i � $ � � j � � � Ind , ! ! ( I ll I I - ! I L'T iji 3 € ; ?!d j € 3 g i i ' ' dl € 1 i I d d i € t +r d} Id ¢ I sr Sj# I r rs I It — — 1= -- -- £— £ ' £ £ t i tIPIQ Ili r f r £jiitl P t!E £ £ £I( ( £ tlf I t f , € t i t [ £ t { t [ £ f £ f [ t I f t f t f t 1 t f m 111x3 = :!fSllrSif Ili it.ili € rl { til SS51i3iifilifjl�ifllitil r i � r° Z �_ � � � li � ►�� �l11 � ( I � l � � � l � l � t �I�II� !!Illllt � � 4 � � E � � {fi( � i � � il � lti� ! ( 16 � 1 � � { iili � iiili �I$ � � • � � IIItIt � It # ;'g 't< �eIEt ���s4 �5 �}3eiiflll p( I � � yt I. its ,I � � l - ! � l ti � � f � i ( l � I � � � � ( l � � 1 r t ( z z ! ! I I<I , I I- - -I iii I . 1:.!� :,_ - .,.I. � ,!� � - ^I• t - _!e . jllale'1 m0 m m Y % gti iFslB'�% %Ii % SIYY3Yfild 1 4 i I- _ % Y9 % i r 5191�11II1111111 / II! 1 , $ 1 ,1,id ;�, I�Y ►j, ;! I, � g �^ siI - - --- I-- - .. mo m m �.I 1 I 1 M. o $� ! Ir; k \1� ioo •� � m - t-fj' L4 gb.LP ��� iSSt,� - :t iIIIIIa II �! ISI I I�� a gydv" - l,tC5y yl01 -,ejy,1� 1'1 iI I ^I(I I! •. d _ I I � j I Ii jl �� ��• W I Af o � I� •��rl I .�r Z5 �6 iilll '!!lei ,i,,li n> y i'I — Oo w o Z CO , .;a y>y _� , .111 \i/ � j 2� .� MID r o� m _e., 1• LII �� 1 I.. 1 M� m Z m T i�'�`(n ca 0 ' ..i i•III _ i I r m Ij ,11 iI 't IIII h 1i j � 1 •. s I � 0 , 1 d i I � lit. i I 'I I , � j fiI4ll i _ g 7,1 f _ I o i. >;�' ? ._... .. ••�' ilk '.III, !I. !! . I m �c • `, � IIt; I � ' o I I vo Ny D' I I I F I I W I i II n ,.._.. '. %fit .—. .' ._x x x& x 1t - x x - ]r19, X ,a_iL�S. •. .� ..1 BB50'1S xx xxx ,00c x �Yt x ZR __�eaee�reea.aeza .._ xit :yye,_,x_: & _ 1 PrTTSBURG AVENUE ..I,... ..: _ I _ , I ". StsB. nBq nR� I iilll I' I �r f . g410 uoo f III I I,I It,. ll I�9 fi •_..9`, ,,a � L 11111 ; tl I I I IIhID 1111 '' I d00, m I m .. _ d6yga .. •;' j k Ilii' I IIII dl�jl-,: l V+1+ p I � Illlll IfillI II Gi" 7 O �II.� I 1;l ill! m0 >x N p sn n> >o dy' 9� 'I�I I III I Ifl rZZ r- ° r i �Il Iit Ilj'j'll o i 1 I 4 /•-,% I/ i� I IIIIIi � III` i' , IIif m o d� O I - ... �///,j '� Ill l I I 'I!' < 1 - i i... un Tz - 9 Z � CDgo 10 a� 00 0 CO MO S� Of //// n I J <00 Z � 6 li./. I /. i / / %• /. / ' /' � i / elf �II i I III III ••'I-' / r //r r , l / /' 11 •• •II II II, 11 O ,• i , f D IM y/ G--. // I' -A—Z, �,_�m „k I _ / , � i .. /' /' / i i 'i. /' ✓, ' I ji Illi 111;1 !�il m a a l!I ._ __-. '�', �/.. /// /• / �/ :� / Y� rl j.. 11 ,.t`�,`I ; I I��t•.1 X1!1 /.. ' Il II ✓ S i 11I Ifro'_(xrr, ii 10, I' 1 h a - / // �i i' //� ,i 'j' , /:i/', // %• /, / ' rt j, I ii 11p jl I��� '4 0� fl� i i I i ,, N. D I I �' I ljl I - " /'' / i• I I 11 I i rp Zi ..v N88507J IY _ 7429 - , jjIII T F4�. Mm PITTSBURG AVENUE ^ 1-7 Crl t— :k I I 40% i I j , I li I I I �I I I, � .• . Qp' g T_0 I i III I t �$THE$TLi�'-I�� LOT Q r� „�I•{I .tli, ill - = r - r •r 'r�'I� 7 1 .STREET-f_ ®k -OQVAL I ,VI 1 I IS 5 11: 1 II,• i/ mal!` I rrj i T LOT P I II' ii i f T . : ., ., y _ vel � 1 ��I ..r ® -� I I II, •111 (I �- COURT —_� I - I } - LOT O' L1y at.-' --lei i IIc ;® ® I 1(I i III -'i d �J. (�; •c® C,J �, I � `� ' I COURT o - o t 7 J S I V _ I I STREET QLOT M e - �> CC) `� i...f,l -_i '�l_., -L___ f I, l q # 5 (p L 'IJ'I I i1'4 I I I I > OD - L j. i G . I .I � f0 m z3 _ COURTc co C 7G w D Z U1 LOT LY 1 I , -< Z Z ff r-, �`f^1 f( r it co I I 811ILDIN0 S 3 I _.�8. __�.t - .._• �_,_.` I IoI. I) 17i t Ii 1 rr BI�ILDAl10 t--- t z i f I _� I 1 O•- �* }x5 �P c uR -B_ D �:L�-,'."' I _ `- I F` � �: C I IJI; -I,I ,I 1 I I.•II�, t I II r' .�= r e I t - £. "1 .r--1'- —I r f ,I II .1 it LOT T —LOTH I I I I 'S 1 , i I I STREET P O —� coSJRL �1 _ I I 1 R 1 T- Ii t I II i I I T_E H LOT J litII I I'�11 J r,R .�I 1 t $ �" j t I G� �`-��' 'I �cr•-� Il II I I,I I I�. I I ..la i•I I i h ' �f jlIt l' 1 I' �InL�INQie ^ 9 _ -s1' rl; J I' rfa r ? I v�1. ' ! I � 01 ._ _ .4 (l �t: � I r�! t. BI111.DMQ B 9UIL41NQ4 ' Crt - �I @ ,il•�I I li{ i _ I II� LOT I I I i �' I �• _�_�-L_-i I€ _ I�� �---� �--4 - i� r" � .� � -- -'� - {� i Ii i, I� li` '''ll �l�'__ h (• 1'!Y a L r.`T.'Ul I... ® I � 7 r I r� 1 t•�, `�® r- I sr � In ,--, ,: 1 •I; i O i:•JI o - ! `' �'� ' �I'��;� ji.I,--�Ia ���� �-..: � jG� ' I�� ����O,—�I k i-�,(.., L- ,�� c•.f.� I � m ' - STREET 0 .� (.Yr—IQ `�z'-� ;. G'� I ?i__I_ m l N �o �7�• - Iwl� j .. I i I jE (�� i 1.6; j '-K ,I_ •Be- __-rs ,-+� � ��� I II { I•I II :I{.. it > t' !n IL c S I'I I i i I i •t p � I--- r r -i ,z" n f l l Q S rt i -Ij IIt i ' I L r %� ) IpIL I V �VILQIN01 r I / z1ill{Illll I I•.,' u I I ; 09 - Ia.a'7. - I NA850IJ1Y 7119 m 1 • (�'� I� �I `. .. ._ � :. ;• � .�.I 411 j ..t- 1',. c, � In, ,! �� ga I i I Ilii ,i ;I ti �jO_ 8 RFbg 9 < R I, I a_ 1V _ • .I it II i 'i I 1 ^ � eg�� _ �� g � �h a, ter' r ti111�I.- :�I,I r• 11111 rtr. 1El 18Age d15oe �y `y ,(u" FJ 3 � k g 888'8Ym o \� is AT o I! ! 1 I I F!I I II � ��� ' l --� •'d'� y>a� � - , � k !}I� I IIS I 116661 o n 1 s N ryI} E�\ �•� .�. I �^� - 1'b,,�l;ti�.,i Y, it .1!111 Illy . Intl �( o m �i ��� >G:! :L._ ,< �': -r°t��t•• g ��gg�� f { F• STREET--E 1-"".�— / �•I IM I P fu III I ! �l�'..I I<{III I II� X z LOT P^ h it Ni B I I I II II Z 2 V m m m m a .19r 'I , I I €r �i Irll III {II m t' 'C.7.; ",�. ;.� ,. .. ..a... -.. .......I, .5...:�]L53C '•� _'E ,C -1x • a wn���t A �� ....�: .. "�g�,�.. o : wL '•�"'4�", al(,j U' 01 t' HP b.-:a%•j - { h_ �� - I L -I I \ ( i' ��� l J I;'I ,I I i �I p �� I® (.ts� �'� r: _�; C�r. ®-I I �I' � :���; � f _ cou •o°�(er�+t� + I., `� �F Vie;✓{/ I ,:. �i I ;h "� alJ _17 � ' +�I���II I s '�Il��!z ar ._� _ 4 Ix _ -1x W o� C,I - IQ h' - 1® . �.: � '• I�.l I I I 11 0 '.nr�s,'rcre' :13 IC IIJ'i \tt�.u', ,-11 I! -- -- v,_INj4. II•''� il���.�,.. II i I ti II STREET 'JillS; a O • LOT M, I I I D 1 1 OD 1 70 �r o' C \ � -� � -i'I � r- h I r• m ly — '� f ( ` „4, I.. _ _ - - - � = 13( =la �I'.M_ _ta_'TQ ���. .1 �� Ir—__ _--' I �I I I,,{a,.11�^l,III I,�\� +• Z Z r0 B Rb N0 - I t mr d I I I IIr' o >a� 00 Baoo L a e { t I ( i1 ' IIIIIII� l r 8 I - - I(J a cou B { I y iiww 4 LOT a I wl . Do �y D � It _ T.- �_ d � •-{"'' ._ rr � _,_ -.-dl _ ., ,.-. , rs_.._--- --,-! � �1' _�- 11�'1u00HR'�.-A ;I: r :..-i---i7 tae I I l I ��m D O _ �:- I� _ �_�� - I � - '�- _ _ -��. � tI` 1111 ° 1 i1 !1'"I 1•h� Z LOT ��� P a 1_ :j] 1 r'F1 UI INS 8 Q - Q a l,-{ F,�' • { { I ,I 111 I'A1 I I! iii ;III I�1 / t -\ �; �^ 11 (7 < a NIS ,� h_. ..... I,.�, ,1; I ,I'II I !II'•• '+1 : a l B R 6 i,- U INO 4; I • � f I i �il� 10 "' I I11x aTRE o: 1 1; I ! I�11 I1 ((• I,I, f 1; Ilii ti1 t. I r ! i�11I ' '' IIII' •i II rtrz3i `•P^1 STREET Q �_�, i�/�i�✓�� �/ v '1; P 7 kl,� I I , '�I; I III' �1 l I I I! ii il� - _ 1 I1 11 �� L. � � la)--�' �. I � .rc rzs iP �� _ , 1 - aL(J t. � �1• �� •!�'( �I�II{ I i1 ,il�pl 11 �� - � N e ILD o A °' g� w�� f I - — I I � , o ,O .1 _ 1 :• I�� VII( l�I� u 1 o _ 1 m .. LOT E b ' em :. ':._ _ e m�,�, - - - _>>_-—•—uxxwer"_---• I �!m r�.—�..'—�_ — �''1 tl•},1y ''i.. vn � ..'.' ,` -- _.- __ ai - � LOT•_{" x,-" .��//i'�•.- -_.._.,-_.. it� x `Ply U Ar/ENIIE— . a h - y 1 I I I I 1 I t If i'Ii:i•�i .....- .>..ii I.J i� I i•i I i I f t 1 I I 1111 r.. I l!� a f: tI,I ,tA1l . �-� -' [: � .. - / / J$_ - _b�,. .`III ••I I �! I;: ;1 .101E P� s.rJ .} 7 �1I 1111 lar u / i11 t I 1 _ ..g+'� o ...-L��..�L� ...-1 4� 't,� r !• (i tit- I LOT O at a �t ... //� �-'} _� ?' m D II wl - �•1j 'll &I i . v ! LOT ��• v .��/ � , I rq'r- -_ ,- �, II: ^`jl I(1 I'ii;li.i II i e I � L _ ` 'ice 1 G'i�i ' esa V. t i /�� r�5��i - - O• j I - y, -- iirlt I •� ,� �Ii�'�� a: -STAEE7-J. o LOT iii 1 yii 1 II 4a �)i II i I t i 1 I, _ _%.1M7[ U I _ i h �•_ 'ill, 1'I ' '� i t I ® p I G° v I - as 3 } � {pI1, .I)I 1I '� �I111p '!.'�.... •_ C ( ---- TSIT �EE7 O� i nl �-)e's `V L,l L} 'y{L. V j LOT-SIMP z - -LOT M t:1! ��1 � 'tij I,'� �HI�`• Q .r ' rl-i---1 :', I -I' F11 r1.�:_ 1 �' ;f 1-_.I.r7 Sp `w I° , i r IIJ�i-! _ i F-' -� I-•, : �! i�++.�Vi i� I ! I• ® t•.- I }11---1 x) -t!� (I ---! r�, r F I, , •_�-j �� t, i i i.�` I � � I ;-_�1 n � Z 1 I� O BLRD Na 0 BUILDING 8 1 I _ t i �__ _ 1 II( •� I I , 1. ` Z / I � i... � I__ .�. _ ; �� � •' 1-- I! ,jf f I il• i D W i. 97�$€T f- `LOT L av'eor it i;I• II i 1 O 9 - ca" s � OD it j -z1 `-� t!r--li -i y�1 - i ' ��' 'j _ )� i I�� 1 ry - ! i!I II I�i•I•i lilt I���FTET < � r-_ Z , r 1 , Y 1 - ; 0 Q ! _;I �p {�i; : 1 t O O yLoi--7- -r .� ., I I 1 r,.- It(• a m y , I' ta! iI V STREET P •� 1 ,! , , \• lz f 11 1 O D i 1 7�• f r' �r, � I ! Vii_ 1 � t � 1 � e4+ +I i II li it III lil I r:i _ f m STREET I iLOT J. _ ..,I I I (� =-1 I•J j9.- ----t, _ i IL I,�T _ IL li I (, 111 �j ,.I �t II i $UIL�INoIe S ��? 1DVNO b — r I i•-! pal , I'; I I 10 .C): I I _�•t ,_.C. - is -rt! L ,v t " 1 fi g , l �UILdMa 4 T I V J I' a B RbINO I 1 U G- - r 5 •t I+ , 1 1 � �- IAl `I ! � +1. i 1� -�kl !, -1 lx) ) i � Js t� -I ��-=1 t� --- �' •� O l��� SF, ) lC� I (� I / r Ia -+• T Ilii l„. lil' (ii ( ili 14if 1' 1�'�r� -t1 C' I`-� G 1 V Z 1�1 i j�, I, I IiR In.jjl L•__j `Tt(�t� 1 1 lI STREET O tl' i 'I 'a.• �t ;U'l, o T I L. I till{ I�•i l (, rpt : 1 '.y - �@ ��. --L' -1�] I• �I :�- I� ( _' - i 1. fa 1 �� F )• I�I! i 117: t,l � 1 i_a-it 7UV ill rli . 1.1 II a. N(A {, BUILDING 1 ? �ulLbBlol l O{ -; D°� I i .., �- � k�. 1_k_2 .- P r I C71 t � (7 i;, Ity: �:,�,I�I 1•i i� d O v$ N d LOT D T Jl l I: p ¢j :.. :- ,e�m ' , re•m re'm re-so I +e•m +e.m t i. - I , £ fD -- - �. VI 9 fA'J°TS�,_ _._ - _ _ d .-W J �� � 1 -n --R P ? 7� �' � $� gyp+ e m 1 �---_-- � a �n ✓; .�^ _"`, -- /� • l'i •y�r � � spa p y � i h 1 ---------- ----------- - ---------- 21 ---,_-------`----- _ l }p 4 \_\ f71 i �n g� 4� - q C :• -I14' f 4 »M 00 i { o' m m mDu ,r cry O i T� I `1 9° Y li �1 COURT COURT t � e m D v p(�q am ti NIM V 9 A COURT F COURT i W i h , i w y � t I . I k .0Io00 �i I v it � 8 Az a g g A g i o o 0 00 II j I yn �>•; t z wunr o ,�I i V/ C � 1 j 7 W LOT err�er wIF � � I "3•, Fj- i E I Srn Ni o LOT P .. � p6Er' • �IA I 1 i� ij V' � � Z . bdr 9� :CaINTN COUPTe S j� �i LOT O J -�- � � �OOW�gi I! .IliJ _ r._• - OOURT O '. Iil ' CD zAI � � � � D I eTRmr o • N Lor 9 LOT M l co\ { J _ i_ .� _- cant■ - .I i CMfJ I z o \ J z`;j —N— m Q r- 10 Z Rld+1 . 1 , r--d�-1'- �a---d�-r Q '_ � 'b'-�'� �7 � - eam P 0 �� -cwnr fc� eTn�r f � LOT L �r I i ! P' y I euenna m L;"S e �- iin- Cco D LOT T LOT N u m eTRem P� count A � III I'�t 'ttm • DU z J "-' • 5 !THEFT N LOT J ( 1 i i! B,ULMA a 41 LI 1r1�1JJ I_ �_>r; _; � I Res -1 _ Z eOUR N is i G I Z S s I I" i. aTRESTe L 'A elN6T o It ! Sr -.. : N)8252JW _1�8f _ N8B50'Ij]Y j�2�; - .. ...�• z ri r ca 91 wl ri Pl R 25 $-a as s �g gin No Noa g ' 5>�� yN-z2 F �~ 8 Ygom :THH x N-- ET, �'. sZ � < \ Ncaurnn vwxw.{r >>o9 9 52 FA p yA$ aaa'8.m. 5 oR - - � > o< \ 3 _ !D P1 p p w nn pm arm nn cm on va a o o 5 5 1, 0, o. z e 1;o 1z > > >>r r 0 z z o o > M o m w z 1z , a. z>z z z z 0 x > co I g , I :fo* co". w> z al g > -z om m 0 o 9 Zz.v_ > > m o m 0 > m 0 > ml o 0 > m o" mea 0 x x x x x x x x x x x mm . . e C> o o O "o o"mo o 0 cl 0 1 0 I w o)ED > 1.j :1. 1 0.;3 p N a;m {I 1I Q; ^jrT tt I it jg m 81:So m -fa- W 0 A oo c..C; C:c r -c >1 > IJ > > > F, o> oo; LOT Q li YI F11 Z__ >0 > P _> • > L COURT-F- > It m ryl r o o0 3c 9 o o NO m —At > D> LOT P @I ,z ®r o U% r > fa A1B piL LOT 0 -4, I I!i ll i:, I I ""Il�ll••II G COURT Z Au -41 ........... :6 ou IG o STREET 0 LOT S LOT M > 0 14 1; o Z z 0 @) I'" i <Cj I —'�t�7 c IIFi 1!_(I 4. I''% Ih I Iii > 00 0 IIIIf 1. (o ALI- CD B RDNO 0 LOT L :< I IS ® eJ I t,}" III I I I III!Illi: 0 a 0 Q > nnj M 0 I _ ii. 3 I vi ©i I ' I `� } - cou -- Ii j � lil "III II ' z < < 0 -uLOT T LOT K ou OI lu- f F , m _u 0 I OURT A m Z - w n ... 111111 LOT J it ;it tV i� UIL ING 6 a -07 L III' rn 1 ILD NO UIL ING 4 LOT I (6L`_' ' a+ + �I'f ' ' III!:• aToi I Q) it ST EET G r I > F 'LO ` �- STREET 0 12' 10 !it 12) 211 o u✓n iLt.�� I i_ - I - - I I I <Q ( •I I � ' !��li I:' !II' I tI i Is j'�I(I •I �I '• �,,(�•1 Io _Lr F2'14 W. r 0 P m > x iq X x X x x X .x,1 I ENT7)✓--- l vdt LL mr WN" m o cz ' -.,_ ... i:.':'!�:,Ir., t i ;III •11 I 'I ' „I CO T o - � � � ilI �i I •I)I1 I •yea.:'/ I I` �`_ f— - I i �.d'? Iff Im - o =R--1 LOT O .. .., �// 1 1A'�- 2 �� _: _ _ II` I i Y��i•,e,rl I�III' III c.` n G - - II �II /� t I STREET-E- 17, It CQIJR.LF f S`I _ . I III ti .. • � / 11 09 FI I LOT P iCGI �tsT«r66-'r2 �-'~ I 1 ' ;q `-.®.� i ( 'I Iljm,\�i`I�' ••� RI 't _ COURT F, ! , � 15 1..-.... i($�I S ��a , _.yI -ac.W.•, I LOT y j jj W t -Yi O 09 _ ® 11 I III Ili...1•. �i C� - n II'f V .r �r 1 0 t I STREET O 1 GI I .-.er QDS LOT S LOT M n Z i = :"'('�. s I I _ I Z _ _ .- ice, Z m ' I - —{- - ;._ r�. �I , i f�' sem• - :s 7_ :_' rL, I C 4 4 :i i i, — Ir �T `r?i II L_- 5�, �tl Tp •----; 1•-s'•-._ is a ? , I ® li„I Ir,I I' `;il I,j.b� II•1 r.:. W 6 - I Ij ' S I $ _ COURTS co 1GO a Z M :..t t '1.._ r. _.i.._i ._,ri�., -. - p � �. '� � - _�I„• I I �.1 �!t' III, ,-.�.!' B NAINO IO �_-_I i B DII O BI i .__ e� -"S r_f ,� 1 , :� '� O -tY y,,: :... �_I ,:1 ra -• I— ., , - :8 ETI , LOT L I`• q i!I, I i I 1 f iI j Z Z In' _ -- i�"'�"�t - O/ i J'� - � I` `l IO I L III I I 1 a \ BlI LDIlYO F ( 1 1 BIlIILD O 0 L�r 1ar J - r - va # I ' z I I _ —IrF, Ilh;lr, _ 1. a T m I i I--`- IU' a e C , - cou -e !� I i ;,• I .II I, \ : Z I I- f 1 I IT I �I VIO [. _ I! 1E JY -,,,r_... _ i! � lO i IiI iI1I t I L�y}O - ' LOT rK Its s' a rn'' !' I'l�' 1 1.-FY�-� r---�•-aed •_'1.11c-'___”-_ '� S I __._ _ I !I" ,' I I'•,1 Ij.. m ®` STREET i I.�. (7• , rIa' j� lily , m I II I�., I`•I il) 1 -�T_ �r5--��L? _,•---r-n 1. j._ II lo' i I; ,�.I --♦- � '� , rCl a '� rJ I i I�,: � 'I�I' i(i� ! nI �ulLglNo1e -..- j"allo a i . I r - Sr• p t�'. _!a �-! J� ; L,�--,•_-I.. � !.�.�, �� i �pL � Q, I 4 I I If�,II I i III•: I II�- rle• la �, moss-'L__"_*"`r- �aa�-•___• �� F , 'I ;:.,1' �� � _- 1 r S�]O' •s 3 O� I LOT l , I ', 1 11 • I I �•_• I B DjNO ' I }_ VILM3 4 I 1 'I' I I '��•,`i'i. I , I { z r I; r•-r.r'�'�(� �� _ea•r_S Z -J._ '•+-' I 1 hill. I.. Ili N1L; r~ STREET O d} _ -S 7r'n^-' I� 1 I Il' IIi; i ¢o ��� ' -; �� L. --'�-'[T ;•7�i�-'S '- Ij=� -*�i� I + I I 1 YY. I 'I I I i 7 , r�j �I. I I 1.7 f"I I I I I � j �---1-_eyr��L '1»:.1�� - .-�,•� I {IhI' I 11 A I t T— -y k' �! ,• a lv_I ra L v1 It II i ( I I;i .l.}- ISS -y�l- � � I II t �• m }" v rn _ ', M DURQINOi Ip, 3Y•-., i0 1 ; I t' I B D o , - � I 1} vi I� tJ rla•L7 r>e•z.1 !_.u _L�sr.3' y 'OZ.J1:.J�__ i.�Itll�'=!'I 4 u - 1 NdB50'IJ W 0 4 �. 10.0 G —_ _L. Iq.i• r - NHB50'IJ•W _ - - F VENUE-- - _ < F W �� �a > v ao x fts j 1 I I I _ s a � s � � �-�• 11'I I II•LI I I �; 0 p� D .. - �� � � �•' � 91�� 'q o-4yy� �11�� I l?`iI o $ S g'> < o ..-. - - i Msc `It113 II,jV I :i I l•.• II Il/Io 8 q -1 _• 11��i�.� TUU, �' 1'i I 'i I �yRi �j...fl � 4 ., m � � m I s _- -g- r • I II I I II I I � ' �i•� 9 ® I iIi I II I II` a� I.. ._ ' / - � - �J�'\\l� y� iv r Om I•/I+'�I�•i I�.ItI i I- � I� o" {� LOT O I• j�l{. I fI(,.Ili .III'I lI�.}h STREET R z u w 19 5 -' COURT F STREET 9 g © - - I ' t m > i `5H II �I `Q (lIW LOT P i11IfI .�I (lj ' I• ., • � � � ,9%�� gL(`'� i Ig �_ 'y�l• L.II I� IIII I;I �.. .,.. b1r✓� Qs ®I I I" II III li?IIa , COURT E gid E ® n, OI E .Ip a LoroIL.' IIII,, / .. oCOURT® 'I" ��II., {� �I� jll•l�Il '. /� .. � m �" °I E9 - '° � S® _9_ � 9 I.l �li I � rl.I•�I II}I I'' m1 1c: 'rn � °I ILOT M � I'I-pSTREET 0 �� .. r 0 -le jL 19 z �-- 1' I Illi ''•I Ir'W I I! F. I I I b m COURT cm I I I'r,�'I I( �'I ; '�' '. I I , II III ,it Z BUILDING 10 BUILDING 8 > � I -\ I L (I I I j' II ItI 11 1 O ix T I tr LOT L I I II II l+'l I '^ 1 A> T W ' oq D W -� g I III i I IIIA.. z-I BUILDING 7 BUILDING B o ? -.- -TAT OI 0 q I' j l jfI II Ili^III . O COU B v G) z - �IRR MO O a. , - ..LOT T LOT K I• IIII;' .III III I D < ' ' ; ; ;; � I il,ll IIII;„ ?• .; I I I t`II y a Me OOT a >Q o COURT A STREET P C It IIIII I.,Il �• T T T I illi I I, V I,1 ---{{ }}- L07 J 70 7•I�TII +' 't_ S) -4 IIM II Z BUILDING B BUILDING 6 I ou I(J 1p m ® 'I I I II I I I I III a In 91 I„I I f .III I�r I IIi gin' yl QI E I° `p i rel �I Lor I j Ij BUILDING 3 r-BUILDINO_r{_ - I II I i !j p• I^?j) d I I I I I 'S £ '� O w I� o I I i ;I, II STREET O r0 'I; 1 ( I III I I1„ I SII 0 I I!II - 'it ji I•. lig � , 'I ®I _ 10 Ig _ II STREET O I O I� t +`. I I I I ,III •,I III• I'II -7 �I OI j1ll j i I IIIj � 7C) IIII I �- -� �- -s L” jlj•1({� I I � �'�I '� H(p t BUILDING 2 BUILDING 1 I(�• lO I� !'j I ' Ii I I I'I j � 8� �_; l / g- QI E I(� ' III •, I � ��{ ..}�II^'l1 ••.i >1 ^NE830'lJ'W O0 O O 0 �y m i •� QIIYIJII'�.r -•' -. /Pg! N�S742.L 1 I''•`� �PITTSBU E -_ rq C ,� I l r _ ii.I,i I ,•ilj l lll�l` I I N ' I .p • j ------------ - 1 j o�� pJR M5 > ---------- --- ` Fa p N � (l) - Du fTl v 4i U) 0o ---- ° m to a W D Z WM ° 0) z Z [; a 6 ^ r 0 74,7 111 FACE CF am p Lk4t- m U3J co, r D 01 i i COURT I i. e' II! co 6' I J' I ♦ IJ.e' 1 uw D m > 9 (MIN v _ C� __—__ .___- 6e --- � (MM L o i .' a« N 7 Lia 0U0Qggqy� -M1 m sy(A(D O O IN, am EA X In A R W _�— e S (uw) o= � p AI A (UW) p;-u rt m 6" y 6' 5G Z U� I, = MrN A I i O m D m Cl z N 11 z p COURT V� r r <a ��� � � t l EXHIBIT5 Hearing Notificat on and Marling List NOTICE OF PUBLIC HLARING BEFORE T111E CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARI'_>' OF SUPE11VISORS ON PLANNING i IA-TTERS NORTH RICHMOND AREA NOTICE is hereh\ given that on Tuesday. February 13, 20(17, at 1:00 n_m._ in the COLMO, Administration Building. Board Chambers. 651 Pine Street (Corner Cif fine and Escobar Streets), 1\1artinez. California. the Contra Costa Count' Board of Supervisors will conduct a public hearing to consider the following plashing matter Applications suhnlittCCI h\ Signature Properties (Applicant) requesting approval of a 370 unit residential development on a 29.2 acre site known as the Nove Prnperty (Asscssor Parcel Nos. 4019-1 70-072 and 408-180-010) located at 500 Pittsburg Avenue in the North Richmond area. incluCiing the following: A. General Plan Amendment (County File: GP904-0008): An anlendinent to the Land Use Fliellient of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020) re- designating two parcels (Assessor Parcel Nos. 408-170-072 and 4(1R-I80-01O) totaling 29.2 acres from Ileavv Industry (1-11) and Light Industry (LI) Lo Multiple f-amily Residential — 1\ledit1111 Density (�-4f41), and: 13. Development Plan (County File: DP905-3024): Approval of a Final Development Plan to const-uct 370 residential units os the Nove Property. The total 371* units are divided into three housillg types: 2-story townhouses — 120 units: 2-story clustered homes — 1 10 Ullit5: 111d, i and 2-story condominiums — 141.1 units. n related subdivision map application (County File: SINUS-8938). which establishes 370 residential lots that range in size from 2,080 square feet nlininrLnn to 4,930 square feet maxinlunl, was approved as a vesting tentative slap by the C OLllltV Plallnlng Co1111111551oll contingent upon the. Board of Supervisors approval of- the General Plau Amendment and Final Development Plan. The Final Development Plan requires 15% of the total units will he affordable, and permits delivery of the affordable units an-site or off-site (but within the North Richmond areal. The Final Development Plan includes a parking plan that provicles for two parking spaces per unit and includes 142on-site guest parking spaces. The final Development 111,111 also sets aside 6.7 acres of park/open space arca. The Final I-)evelopmenl.Plan would result ill an overall residential density of 14 units to the net acre, iwhich is consistent with the reco.nrinended General Plan Amendment to re-designate the site to Multiple Family Residential — Ivlediunl Density The location of the subject property is within the unincorporated territory of the ('aunty of Contra Costa. State of California, generally identified ahove (a nl(.)rc precise description may he examined in the Office of Director of Conlnlunity Development. County Administration Building). For the. purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (.CE(1A), a Nlitivated Negative Declaration (SCI-192006102106 ) has heen prepared for this project (no F. nvironnlental Impact Report required). If you challenge this matter ill Court, you may hee limited to raising only those issues von or sonlellne else raised at the public hearing described in the notice_ or ill xvritten corl-espondeoce. Prior to the hearing. Community Development Department staff will he available on •Iuesdl}'. I ehruary 13, 2007 at 12:00 p.m. in Room 105. Administration Building. 651 Pine Street, 1\9artinez. CA. to sleet with any interested persons in order to ( I ) answer questions:.(2) revie\y.tile hearisLZ Ill—cedUres used by the Board: (3) elarif\ the issues heing considered by the Board: and, (4) provide an opporttnlity to iderltifj', resolve. or narrow- any dif(erences \vIlich remain in dispute. If you \wish to attend this sleeting with staCl, please call Patrick Rt)che, Conu1)unitti Development lle)�arhrlent, at (925 ) 335-1242 h\ 3:(1O p.m. (m Nlomlay. Fehru<u\ 12. 20()6 to confirm your participation. U lte: Jvnrlr, 31. 2O()7 JOHN CULLEN, Clerk of the Board of the Board of Supervisor and County Administrator BY: f � — Katherme Sinclair, Deputy Clerk 408170046 408170047 408170051 BERT'S PRODUCE LLC RICHMOND MICRO METALS BERTS PRODUCE LLC 1420 ROCKVILLE RD PO BOX 607_ 1420 ROCKVIL.LE RD FAIRFIELD CA CONCORD CA FAIRFIELD C_A 45>4 94524 945;4 408170057 408170064 408170066 MAFFEI JAMES J &PATRICIA B CCC FLOOD CONTROL&WATER EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DIST 506 DE CARLO AVE CONS 11500 SKYLINE BLVD RICHMOND CA 255 GLACIER DR OAKLAND CA 94801 MARTINEZ CA 94619 94553 408170067 408170072 408180010 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY NOVE INVESTMENTS NOVE INVESTMENTS 255 GLACIER DR 3260 BLUME DR#AD-968 3260 BLUME DR#AD-968 MARTINEZ CA RICHMOND CA RICHMOND CA 94553 94806 94806 408190004 408190005 408190009 dMACC CORPORATION CPM PITTSBURG LLC TRUONG QUA-NG V 5801 CHRISTIE AVE#255 385 PITTSBURG AVE 1228"61 ST ST EMERYVILLE CA RICHMOND CA OAKLAND CA 94608 94801 94608 408190010 408190029 408190031 TRUONG QUANG V WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DIST WEST COUNTY WASTEWATER DIST 1228 61 ST ST 2910 HILLTOP DR 2910 HILLTOP DR OAKLAND CA RICHMOND CA RICHMOND CA 94608 94806 94806 8190046 408203010 408250056 CPM PITTSBURG L L C COLORVUE GROWERS KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC 385 PITTSBURG AVE 2206 CENTRAL ST 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY RICHMOND CA RICHMOND CA PLEASANTON CA 94801 94801 94566 408250057 408250058 .408250059 KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC. KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON CA 94566 94566 94566 408250060 408250061 408250062 KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON' CA PLEASANTON CA 94566 94566 94566 408250063 408250064 408250065 KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON CA 94566 94566 94566 408250066 408250067 408250068 HOME SOUTH BAY IN KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC JO KOLL CENTER PKWI' 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY 6700 KOLL CENTER PKWY PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON CA 94566 94566 94566 40S250069 40S350070 405250071 KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KE HOME SOUTH BAY INC 6700 KOLL CENTER PKW-V 6700 KOLL CENTER PI��''"V 6700 KOLL C- -T-TER PI:At-',' PLEASANTON Ca. PLE..SANTON' -`. PLEASAI�TOl 1)45bb U4Jb0 c),!Jbh 405350073 405350073 405350074 KB HOME SOUTH B.A`:- INC KB HOME SOUTH BAY INC KE HOit,IE SOt'TH BAY.INC 6700 KOLL CENTER PEWS' 6700 KOLL CENTER PKV,")— 6700 KOLL CENTER PI:\1'Y PLEASANTON CA PLEASANTON, CA PLEASANTON- CA 94566 Q4666 U4 X00 409310001, 409310004 409310030 WILLIAM RICHARD L' PATRICIA TRE DIAZ MARIA MARLEN CCC HOUSING AUTHORITY 1071 N RANCHO RD 1557 1ST ST 355 GLACIER DR EL SOBRANTE CA RICHMOND CA MARTINEZ CA 94803 94801 U455 409300035 409300039 WEST COUNTY RESOURCE ''VEST COUNT" RESOURCE RECOVERY RECOVERY PO BOX 43165 PO BOX 42165 HOUSTON T1 HOUSTON T1 77243 77243 Terry Roberts Timotliv Sable Robert \V. Flc)erke State Clearinuhouse and Plamiing Untl Department o{ � r nsponattot] 1400 10O'St.-P.0_ Bo:.. ,04aDeroanment of Fish ��. Gamt: 1 1 1 Grand ,Ave. Sacramento. CA 9.5512-31)41 (.)al:land, CA x)46'-); P.O. BUi; 1 l'ountvillc. CA ()4QL) Jim Townsend East Bav Re?_ional Purl; District5upervisor .loi�n Gioia William R. Kirkpatrick �y>0 Peralta Oafs Court . ! 1750 San Pablo Ave.. Ste U East Bay f�lunici�al Utility Uisuict :,7� EleVetltll Si. P.O. Bol 5351 El Cemw. CA Oal�lall(I. <,1 �)4c,i), Oakland. CA 1)46(1_ U3S1 Shawn Nlober`', IJruce Bevaert Martin Lvsons Richmond Sanitary Service TI-LAC' Law Ofitc.: of Ga_cn i11cC;rt� 7260 Blume Drive 77, Belvedere Aye. 379 Front Street Riclirnond. CA 04806 Riclirnond. CA U4501 Danville. CA 9452o i0E 7Ati''IDSIti1 IOH" CULT .viIliE `.'lii:ELICH' 467/0 %VILLOV, PL).. SUITE '00 ;700 BAj%,IBOO CT. P.O. BOA ?UOE�1i PLEAS A NTO;�. C.a C'C)Ir 0 RL). C om. 94 ,t y EL SOBF'_M;TE. CA 04120 TONT PO«'EP.S %l STO-N'E I-T.S T DRIVE ;EXHIBIT 6 Mapsand 'Plan A. =Map & Recommended General Plan Land 'Use »Desi_cinati:on, Nove ;Property, Per CPC Res. No. 5-2007 Count Fi e: GP#04-000.8 Y ) ,B. Prelimmary .and Final Development Plan Count File: 'DP#05-3024 Y ) dated 9/7/2006 Hecommenaea Ueneral Flan Land Use Designation, Nave Hropeny Per CPC Res. No. 5-2007 (County File: GP#04-0048) General Plan Designations SH(Single Family Residential-High) MM(Multiple Family Residential-Medium) ii ML(Multiple Family Residential-Low) f LI(Light Industry) 61 HI(Heavy Industry) PS(Public/Semi-Public) PR(Parks and Recreation) H OS(Open Space) ��=_____ Pittsburg Ave 408180010 _ Davina f l: De darlo Ave k, 408170072 `— llflarket Ave , 3 �} -, Silver Ave l ,t Z i _ r y { T*)_'� R,uby St . 'Marcus _Chesl v.Ave Malcolm Dr_ ; ti t _}� finJ6,�S , •ea u.m,v,arsae Feetarso-�a.+su+,x2mss.aanv 0 125 250 500 cwe.RTN,.+�PaaMmndPupettn Wvaef mibaCmMt Gfimyb $ erypAwE„Y®NYWb110.rmahW6 UeaHTbmW+Pewbm6 aC edp W ISump'tl Cmo•COGM�C4'Mfd 60tlRYpYYFWbtb Mttmllm I I p ' /� ��� � �ir' t : n Ae ❑' $'$: £��i'�e Rm3>;�t� � N , �� c s e � N � I. - ✓` � E p a €R7 m a � e � `S r I 1 i1I ` I - CL1I_l._�?.I� I: tea IL old (�_]� ��� `--� ��_;�e„ia r i i�'—J L_I,-1=:_� , I ,� __•moo_ I p: ..�. � ,! I T- II L (11 I •I �1 i •.�.,, _ .ti I Iu �,,=— -_-c-=' ) Imo. _—_=1�1�(, I,O •..�1., d'. '.:L '-d:, an,r �j`JII- �le'.mIA ernarl, 'Loll —_ - �' U ...1 ,�• _I i' SII 'v •I.� � � ql �_; � I , �, � c.=�L,_a I c � _=�`1 � I I . :� �„ I11 i� lm 171 — r Cdllli A II J0ut, 1 Ilo, � I l• '� � � '1 � �l -- I• �- L� I i91 1'-- —Il I 1 � I-1-I L _ _ r �-_� I tl -� .I � Ii ',n I' �... f � l �Ij`_I � ��LJ <✓ �- I I II iM "I - _ - 100 LI � � n Zr-1 l9- a o o n In $ v9� �`3 �• n z .,' Z - o z c +� A�� A A� ���� $�43 �.; o U�s4 �. i _ EJ ii43 'n. FA �gi�Qi O ' eaQo.Y Yo49 a=°4z ' � F�gp7,j ��r, ���v `7 �' � Y ` 1; a ,. R` Phx'A�'_R� �� ��>t aQ .a �I'>'o$ , ioAv ��7 p � —_Alam_v_ror•,Rtn,,. ... W. � c � L � ��S��G��R4�C�of �� � •�� � spy pN{ba�,y Va�3a�ba� � � �� c ��• � "�y � :z ��€� 9 }jn scr�+ ^� gTq�9A FB9 q i f • I 'I EQ � I . - i � nzy I I II I I • Ei- I li i '1l IL ,• 1�L1I I . `� ✓" +I I it �f ui ��- U '• � I I I; I I co i I zW cp � 00 pC p U , CO I mp �.r' W < fTl D I 0111 ,. Z I I , " 7 I C I Ri I I i I I I , I j it i lu . ._ i um�r.ln tin,i iili I �? re D� ------------ - "- I'll-1 FP Jf , A`:'ElIPF j:. - I,.!I;i' I 'i !i� '1 I ! ;-.i 11 '': ; i I � , t 1`.i ; si• i �i i t i! 'i il-!: i� IIi 1• ( '•ii i I i 1 I i i'' III - ft '1 f,i 'I , Eiil I !.!.?�1 II!�. �! I�Ii,.11�.l l'I f 1 ! ii I i l!i II V 1�:1 II ! 1 �'i 1 1 !.1!I't.-. • ?lt i I I tl FI I 1 I,�I! II ::! � I { ! I I tii , i ;'u I :II I1,? 11! 1 III ,,,i;l II I:il , Ij I',: i , ,i;i:I'' .III, L• 1 I I i!I : I i !',II ! i'1'ilei i i, !4 ? t ! 1111 I!: i ? t I I�i t i l i i I i itll II I,I i I!I I I I i IIi ! I li ij,l I� ! III�. II ii I ill; 'i:. 11 tll: ill t •li� ,. .i: ? !'f i ? 1i�1� i�11: il• I :L`, _ i 3 � �?, tl i� �I I i• 1 i I 1,!I.. I.t,?!t I j ! !i'�.�I i-j, ?III I � t '..�I + ; 1i II� I' I i, il• i•I� -111�I �li �I I i 11? 1 � -j�I i I li 3 -I .I !jii i I i i ,I� i, i I ,.rjll, , . I , II I I _I II � '•, ! III : Ij I i ii I ! I . . - i l I i l l l i I I I ( I I � i I ( I I l i I I i I j •'ii a i!. i -i: 'I ,1 li .•i - - ! I I �!I � _ I I` I i �i I. 1 -�?I.{ II ? i' i it I! is i iIi i �I!l• I � ! 1 ' I I ! II 1 I 'i�! I �i !! i i I r i,l,l ! !,I I I !•i 1 ! I ! ! I ! ;i i li'E :i •, I• �I III I I ! •I I I ;III j ij i , I;i I I`t ? !i t if I. !I I { li{ i {, i i I I:I 1 ill i i.i�{ I' (;I i II! '! ' I' I ' iji I � � I! II 'I ! ' i''`I' i• ! I• '. I! t IIt tlt II ;t I! I i!: ;Ili ?::t i 1 I!, I I'!1! r i. I� i I I I I i_I I. I !• I .I_ _I , I I I.1. -I. .LI I• L1 ,j. ! I I I j�.l. 111 ,I: :1;,1; i�i ,I! II+ lu { I I i ! i Il!i•f�l 1 1 '. i II.IFI i !!1 !�{ 1 !It ( { I ! II 1111 i I I I,i i tll !Illi S il!I ? ! Ii •:ui 1 1 1 ji i;; il''j I�tjt I I s i • +i?It� ! t t .11y I t !!! iif t iI? i t l i l t i l t 1 I� l i i -- = z lliiliill � :liiillislllll; �IillliEil ? i;�I.if li � l � illiilli ;iI!tIIItilillr ! lrl.ill �jlii !illjlilli�ilil { 4 I i i i ; jlt jtiil li EI IIS i F : lili 11 1{ I i '! E i i i' t IItI,I',111I !' ! �Ila,l a!; if i ! i. :i , i II .;jt ili t t t.!il t l i.11 t t1' iiljll i t �II lj i I! I Illt I i ( ? li I;.Ij 1, ! it IF ; ';I1,iI, ! { al!j; i III i 'i'I I I!i I it?I:il I i iilill !I iI !' i 11i1?!? I I ! Rl , ! I I „�l � - kt 6y I al t� 1 !;.' it •I''� 1.1.. . � •:G IstF Lia .e 1 5 ID a teU� - I'1• I•�, CO 1 o: I o u1 •�—� o � I i l :17➢ Co ]�: 1 !• I 1 i I so Co WO O (� v ':� 1 '• .. t ' Fi _z I Z I r r Irl _ I Irl I o Cl il' lit' 3 I , i F: C+ DSD O ! CM) ID .! I• Q ! -� ,� - .:� x c�asuS�"i�-4 ti—S•4 ee&-2 _ Enc�aaJ3 �a��.q�¢� 2 •� n 1 1�� $All _ I l;• , �i [[ co 0 31 _w W ; I a I > - oo 1 � i I $n I> z Z _ 1 •r_J �o 1' I .,nllvl r,F,d . J id it II ru. s y _ �F -- -- ------_ rt ' ^I r lI ISIaURc� A.r.f_IILIF _I I r r , r a4 I I i TREET R --- — II fir..,�/ - _ - __.<_ I I I 4 �•[. °a- —.! _ IGl I I _ f. ( _-I.•_1,f 7,.__._�__ �� � II I.�I f Fr« F COURT_E it I .( .i bLr •.i I - --I. I -I 6 ! .! li' 1-OI O � COURT•O - _ a 91'n EET O LOT 9 -' 1 LOT to O zz -___—.-� - _—.-_ 1._--._. +.` („ � ✓ryJ'z, _— f,� I )�. �'• , s`—� r-- ..I li I: I r Z o ! ou O U) 91M-vH1O to V 1 eIHE_�� ----- -------------- I I I I IOt L II . z z \I I U) C7 9i➢LOTh9 e O 9UIL010O T -- s '-•—� n _ U < E� r �— -1 zt.-.:ice ) —_I'cF r il, r'•. I ( I•'_ �r.4 - I LOT T Lo( Y.fV I: V g It = `—�- _— — _ - ----- ° I r• it _-� — — - (,•�;., m �—_� • III I 1, �� —_ - -- _ I 9•__ I' II 1 ± : I m I _87R_E fi_H LOT J46 = II s O 9uavino•s rb I ( 1 ' T`; ix r :IU• I LOT I1. I; III - 9uko@IO . ' • ; .. F ! ( sem-- �ri 10 —s— :,!fir r� ) (J I��__J_��..I,..,.� I I 17I� _°a I l= 1 v•I /,��C 9fREE T--O �p C F, W(A!p « U 1 [ owo T,M , t _ - W arm odaa 3 ' ro auafinra 1 ( rsq z . J1' flll`13 117 AvTllUE I,I - � 1 ! <Jl yV�zI p c !V `61.1J COl1R1-O INL7.4 L' . m� '- r<-' i, I,N• I ICJ I� ` -J4ce tr- 4 �.. i, a uu � o � ATFEEL ii •"I— ---_Ctlt o +I� , , LII'•• I y I•Y �, r �%� rC.l 7tJ z i � gg ;s� �E� � I F I � _ r�k I !! ;I I •I;I i C Ii l•!1� - L- �; o' 1 u,couet r_ ec.Jse• I fll @ BTnErT E I — _e• — — I' 1 LOT P ii a :coag E or-is F, . V,� U_ = , �:�i lolldl. - L'. 1 •,• Ly ss ie l SIII4 I — )-1I yIL -ju -- iin v� CFF.T O I I1 I•Lol 1+ > J�L .R.Iv_❑ R rl.i - _ ( irk Ol-.1 i µ rd "cl d t m .lU �- ! 1 I��� �__l``1 I ! 1 � l�� � � __� � � Ii,l I_'��I�;� �. ',- _;� � ��,; '1�� I � 4; :�J C._ �1'J;�: L a. ',I I �T• '. cout�'iv_; TT Cp .' 1 ! G..i�.l� _ -� I- ___ �I. -!1 -( f` y' ��j_L_,_SJ I �L-� � '�I � I 11 11 ' I •' ! . � o � _L �� 1t - f_ (�j I •y I• °o '— Z I I:, i et ou�a I Ir r— I 1 z f Pl,nor[o`o I _.. % I I .l ,ite) r - -+i' -w DoT L _ �a � � l! ' u , I. .. f l 1'L 11. ,- r 1 g cn Z _/ L...__ 9l 04 co a , iB'AD 79 �� _ W C �/ .x. 1 1 I , �•. tIr.,lv - _ ( i •r Li,, _611, COUR]'1 86111�1.�. I -.�. m rue v 1 h.� 1 I y -I I I I :u: 1 s': i 1 I�• t _j!� I I I— 1'f r 13 v D !. a Z z z � I,�_T-r-, .-- 1-- __I_.1-�• t - �. � ' l ,I I 11 I , - — I 1 TgsT EE T P. R'1ze T Isl aL — jtj, T= 3 hilt! Z O _ --I �' T-- -''I ( ' - —1 l-. -.� i ( l_ I ,(� ��. •'-- coT J II �) • l u, I - a I u rt7o m } Ll , (-l� BAD H(1 I I UILIINO :U tj � lLEl_I. 6T I <i !: I I O nMr, — -I-(� . •I -._ 1 BiAEET O ( �t ( �, (. rn .tJl�a R yr tEu_a�z rc,�. �s I •I( )J )— ,til :) �j 1 _ r 1,!: l';! ___4.MI �— T — r , - r UA R7a I _-., •I(6) s MII LJ - lJ _( _ �„ N 'IJ , � I Imo. —A—._�'=--.a..--- �i• i ' + ! V _ - _ -- n y — - sa r_.PROM Asx ' — to --- I'115F31 lFG AVEHIJE -. . rtl . 1 I Q) ' I I " I I 1l.ilk 5 I. / „( ,r !- 'I — i_.I .I!•"• I_..I_...II �.:I I7�,n. I lal,�ll e.1et '9TR&T R Ind° I ° I,CD. i F I' Illl�i l#. I •li:i ^at / r£1 __—dt _LL -_4TREET"E eL e y :-cOUR E�. •1I i i 1 .I. 'd' 06[77 I az `i _ . 1. R R' � )• , I _ .I; - E7REELJ1l0' / I p ,q• I � ( I I I I- - 61 1 �� I� I i � I j 3 ! t 60L47T Xe I I II, _1r I• , _._ ,e• ' S' L -_ Ix __.le � —�+ �. - ? , I I I r'L --_•rs.-r__ � I i I 1) li' 6TREET03_' jr.11f:, :I; 1 li � 1 -COT-.9— �ii..�� L011.1 I 1 IyI',IIII, I�f Foti � �•� � I Tr )III b6 III un ;c" 1 m I II r I f�� O l../ iF� • I - i� I 1 II i I I I I• rl o i 1 eim-eht3 le D D �p I I I -. _. � . . .. �t carni-p I`I I ='if �IREET I�•y ui D 11 1kt EUILDRI3 8 .Il O I I I I 1 .: I .I .. - I I 1 -t') — •ms's— I I'I,''11 7 • I I I 66 CAI&1LU �� mss-� I �I o F LOT Y. I I� U - -i'1 II STREET P lJ SLOT I �T I I 0 Sl/ILD1113 C + DUILM43 b yy z I I LOT I r� < W II(I IIIF[ ` —I' T6fiE71LL'V i t law L 1 I _.I-�k� 1 .i.i;' I,li..i.- .� jP t�- I �, I Ir I!, •) ���� I �Z I� e il1V "IF,I� I�I - . - - coDRro' �) I, - - -- (� i - ,- •1 ( '.�.. a _ L➢i)6LR_.2 J�- � ! I lX.11 I� lil I ...y 1 T � _ _�'v-\/ I. I I I 7 I I I i .1:'1 LTiQu�i A'- I I�IS'I►- — /- j.. , I,I 4 a I (D C i•' 1 1 I ^P 1 eun Ddl3 t eun pn)3 1 'caro LOT O in LOT C77 r' �• �i���;; �` �z R •�I W _heu -- _ --- ---_ — 11 _ _ _- — - _ — _--_ __._-___IS UIS:.. r - ! �. •� __ - -Ll1U - - - __ =H-_ - - �� _ -:01. e 5617PG AVE tlr__ '- -'I'I1 I 1 � a ---111 e <iI I I j I - :,, � I y , �, -� I , �� � B a•�� d . j Ip o� � �I ' la � s I� � I �i � �, �§ _ K �P � � I� � g •� ^, a �;�� i a^ 'I:Z I• .1 S• e� _ I� � � y f _ • I I j i — —�I. � jg �g - � I� ��6 � � - 6� I .q I I r � j r I 1 ' •t -_B�__ , ly ° �a g� �E �• , r: I n as I - I• 1 �� - .. ., air � =_� - � kir � r l� I i`( ��� � r I� •I'y ��c 1 is (" _ �� � 6 • gg r 9-1 g U) 7—' r CJO z m t •'n. n ' O co 1,) 7 f;) _ Irl � -� a � ! _;_ I _ ____ __..._.. I ,.� R __ n r -- I � ",;�:�• r I rt, ji U A _ m (J I I I I r• I m ---r a.l _ ' it -- 40 - - I�. r I count rales I -- -- �.r-_..�-j_. -1 j_.---j- N - :I I Cl. m D r m 0 a o r I� -- ., - 1144 It1 I— -- - I t `—r � fv cu I p m =f r -C-�--1�1L-L1-1__' • --LCL.-�I_ �I'-_11----I I L_.' COMM couaT THIM N1 WHOM NOW H 9f. Fq T-P 91, -- - P 9;-,, rid 10 h a to will LAT is f r- io i di _i �1 po "I r 'Pn 1 16 -- F, n; rn E oc) ;Al sitl On OTTIT I I room! 7(C-1 'LLbIJJ' -------- jig Ir s 0D I I Ti- i ch 51,�n Ii i. 11ink!W = W 01 A " M I Rol i'av j � '� i C\l r�>z'--x�+,��-A•-�SY > �rlx--��.%�z-eo- 3c-x s Crzti�aaSr__'_1_I _ -s k . I s % l7�sT % -/:utl b.•yh % x ^___ _.. _ _.4� ---I o' tf e -� - - �s , I I 1_ - J 1. I I I I - r;l - i (ip I ; f I�r o' I Iota In of a 6 � r v it � LA �; 3; - - I t -----t- .,ra I -�. -{ i i } I � _C um;,"--_ C-11 rYIiiIO 133ki16ur_, `\•\_ QZ {a ' - fa' i ISI 1"_l_7��.. .-1_I i !' ' I g ' / I •' -'.R-•� -I I�`I ,_II - u�l] -'; t i( �- � L--- i i y'-- -1 1- --- ' I x f I I 211 s . " ola n ' l � J De anlr a Il^� .. .- I I' Ii II .. f 101 �ti'13�HL6" I 1 In �I [ EI �_i- I �f.. l 1 11�. _ -t p77pJJ tY z �.-Y Luno o R d 13 1 I I 3tl1B I� I � (lis I I I i io, I I ( �'� �. . �.�`F'`t I I ICI='_ L 111 l ! ILlnll � � T I �+L�.�... .'•1 - I i_ 1 l._ ( I I _ �_. _I I 1 II c I I.'- /yam L`) o Jr D Ol 1 Z _ r � o ( �- 1.1 k�-Q r^Ila I I k--- ----------- I ' ------ 1 ja 5 — 'I- c Q u - - - -it • � Zo ,a_. I �4 11II1F1 I I I(Rl - fy Um lk3 —� Y I - - I al „i- 11:1 i -- If .-- 1 �_► __ __ I I_ a -, — I 1 + 1 kw L `J u L -J �I CO Q D 133H16 il' I FF Q, O illnbo 3 = L+� —r " I I 1 1t 'I -- l I a F co °I- slit � �� �,I I r o r 111 I' II O 10, lir 133H1 BSP 'I , �b. I- ,_-( ___.1 �-d3. r W Il I _ r l n � y rLLjjLL � •; ��� G)IN I �.• � --- --��yFe �y w `d kkk .L-) ¢ .( I¢il 7 7 = C5 3 am 101_ IL, .II I I--f ar-�•'�c - __ ' lril __ _ el' ]a ttt -{,. 11 �!f` a r r t- •,= 1 1 - - - p0 r i� Au it if cl 11' I L—.1_'L �_t - = I -�... o o :q9 y� 'L,i „•s.. I 1 9l- lL --�. � ? j` J ll�dd V;'a l•e@ � ,;IS.OIi V o agIu w w IQ ItI p w;w w w W w Cii: g ¢ Tu+rllAQ,auo ' It {' _ H Uj $ 8i o r m o Si g Y n m .Fi a H C r + S• m J 'i 4 J 3 I II D Iir 0 0 LL , � � xx " a mmmmmmm mmmm m� I1I 1 a f LL - 9 m a w {�' m < m u 0 of n m .20 I: n w m �' m Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z CL t- � $ w < m � DwLL = o < < < < < S < < S < < < S 0 J J J J J J J S J J k. O F m m O O m D O 'i O D 0 .0 O O Q a o 0 o LL u o 0 o a o a a LL a a m u � _[ m J J J r U u d la J 1 31,if13r',7 J�118SI IIJ ...._.. , co I --- — — - I r VI in -_- I 140 > 0 1331116 L1001'�� m ',I' 'I I J ❑ 133HL6 �j I' I H rd ,Y, I �. - , i. 'i I "-•..rel_ 1 S '`K".. ( 1 OR I� �;>—.I— .�I__ ��I _-.� �•�� �• - I I I I I � � I I I I I CI` i. ; 1 1 f H' �- 1� I DlaalLl� 4 OIUOlJ1B I i f 1 10l rr - _ ��•� 3 _�a ( � .f } 1 ) I s olrox,-le o ornovna ni c?...} I' li .---I I I I.__. - .+✓ 11 1 a� 1' Y" I _ I I I I - 1,1 Tk i 101 V i _.0no;. .. 1.. lr ~o `- d 133H16 ` 1 L >t lu L �1 t 101 I 1 r I =1I o swazne finlavne S I I � I 1j 816r- - 01 0111 1n61 101 )J ° co COr C o) -- - 00 ^� �J q li IIIA" t I} .,r L ♦! ' �1e11 L I I�mr - --_-- T; II i. rul I I i❑ iJ;:. ) — 1I j 1 1 � ~-..--,�_ - 1 ,I �9„t'.s�1 ) Imo' '—�-- i r :�.._ � T '�-' s lano5 rn ji I'. G 101 1 Il�l I' i ai �I !li I d 101 4$ I; fi=r , 3..133 HiB u l O I -_I El 1331119 r 1 �� �� I� I F❑ Y ---- rl J �BSq Il I : R1 C I = I • - I W-4- _—____ 7 LA 3fll'•13i�V ��IIE3S.1_IIJ - oPF--- DHim n9 L DtuQllne 4)V)N�:r r + callID g; r 1 I — '� O 13381rrIq 6 i1 it I U ij D_1T3tfle ALJ owmine cNicruns I.I Lf LI :I,1 � m I � R_9 - 1 7. rl i - _.1_�f ---{- - •m t ] t ral t _.. -'I c D,oa'Lnel l Ote� B L1. PR _ I, I' 101 G¢¢l H X33818_ <I g lea, I` - J S: ,�� ( _ 1;. —:+— :11 1= —lJ( J��1 cr v 18noao— =� 1 f a _ . _ d 133816 I r-: n_ O } el _ 1 Ol .�1 10, I z, - i - - f ► I����l4-; 1 �- ; ; I� {1 > _, EOz c m j 0 Z l:, t,—, -�—� r ' 3 W oN,Oltn9t arta-me Q7 << . _ l fes- �1 1r fm 1 V--LJ 1.1 �l o t _ ._�. I•;I ;ill ) � `� U ¢LL O ; 1 � ffII R LO 7 FI (•ZCr__ r _ i.i.' �. " d I, anaa 1�_r l �wL- LZ�7.—���i�L.l x -- 0— —r9 101 r 6Q1o1 ( I(al n ,- `r - O 133816 o a - , , m iii u (n n_ - T - I( a lanoo �`I• (` `— `1 ^ ) �I .— � tall Y �I-'III --IfI IN1I 3 :a I I I ' I 1 I I __ - —F� �-r '•) � ¢I i3l I _ ¢ ll�l � _fl �• � ,il —I__ 1 _I ti�1 � . IF MI w i i _ �:I� IIF�rLJ 11a oa vj9 A 1 g w50 fI d 101 _ t - 'P J Luno oil — '� - ]IIa 8 - _ 8 ` a EXHIBIT 7 Items Submitted 'in Response to Modified COAs Fol;low'ing CPC Hearing, 1/9/2007 A "Disclosure Statement Regardin_g Adiacent IMA CC Facility" -� - B. -1/19/2007 Letter from Donald Brueggers, ENGEO, re': GHAD for :hove Property f - I , Disclosure Statement Reaardina Adjacent IMACC Facility This subdivision is located adjacent to and may be impacted by several surrounding industrial uses. Among the industrial uses adjacent to this subdivision is the IMACC facility, which is located directly across Pittsburg Avenue and to the north. This facility reconditions empty used 55-gallon drums so that they may be re-used; these drums may have previously contained paints, chemicals, linings food products or other ladings The operations at this facility are heavy industrial in nature and, like all heavy industrial uses; may impact adjacent residential uses. Potential impacts from the IMACC facility on the residences may include, but are not limited to, the following: Particulate Matter and Odors: As with most heavy industry, this facility emits some .particulate matter into the air. Odors from paints, smoke; accidental fire, and fumes may emanate from the IMACC site in varying degrees. While all of these emissions are monitored by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the facility may, on occasion, emit odors that may be objectionable to homeowners. Noise: This facility operates both daytime and nighttime shifts, and the operations during all.shifts create some noise on the site. Nocturnal operations at the IMACC site may include additional trucks entering and exiting the site via the Richmond Parkway and Pittsburg Avenue, and noise associated with the loading and unloading of drums at the facility. In addition, the production lines themselves create some noise at night. While acoustic studies were performed and mitigations provided to account for this industrial noise, this does not guarantee that the noise levels from the IMACC facility will be inaudible. Residents should be aware that the subdivision is surrounded by industrial uses and they will occasionally hear sounds emanating from the IMACC site and other facilities in the area. Industrial Truck Traffic: Industrial traffic along Pittsburg Avenue and the Richmond Parkway creates a potential for conflict with residential traffic. The IMACC facility utilizes 40-foot trucks and vans, generating approximately 25-35 truck trips per day. Large, slow-moving trucks may, from time to time, conflict with residential traffic. EXHIBIT 7 A FACLACM08377Troposed Disclosure statement 01 1907.doc t GEOTECHNICAL ! EO ENVIRONMENTAL WATER RESOURCES I N C O R P O R A T E D CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Project No. 6127.1.002.02 ,January 19, 2007 Mr. -.Joseph Zawidski Signature Properties 4670 Willow Road, Suite 200 Pleasanton, CA 94588 Subject: Nove Property Richmond, California GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT Reference: ENGEO Incorporated; Geotechnical Exploration, Nove Investments Property, 300 Pittsburg Road, Richmond, California; Project No. 6127.1.002.01; March 30, 2005. Dear Mr. Zawidski: ENGEO Incorporated is pleased to submit this response to the Conditions of Approval for Vesting Tentative Map #SD058938 by the County Planning Commission dated January 9, 2007, for the subject project. Specifically, we are addressing item (c) of CUA #18 which states..." Subsequent to implementing the proposed surcharge program, the applicant shall provide the following: a. Details of surcharge monitoring by ENGEO and materials (and technical data) in a !Trading Completion report). b. Topographic survey map after placement of surcharge. c. The project shall be subject to a Geologic hazard Abatement District (GRAD). Before the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department all necessary documentation for review-by the County Planning Commission to recommend to the Board of Supervisors the formation of a GFIAD, including a Plan of Control and the implementation of an assessment on all properties within the GRAD boundaries to support the activities of the GRAD as identified by the Plan of Control." Site and Project.Description The site consists of t34 acres located at 300 Pittsburg Road in Richmond, California. The location is relatively flat at an .elevation of approximately _*10 feet.-above mean sea level (msl). It is currently used as a commercial nursery known as Colorspot Nursery. Wildcat Creek is just south of the parcel. The proposed development will consist-of smgle-family residential housing and 2010 Ciow Lanyon illacc, a Suit( 250•San kamran,CA X 455:,-4634 • (925)866-9000 866-9000 e P, TD wwx��.CIIgcO.com EXHIBIT Signature Properties 6127.1 .002.02 Nove Property ,fanuary 19, 2007 GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT' DISTRICT PaLc 2 associated roadways. Larger multi-family structures are planned along the eastern portion of-'the site. An approximately 1 .1-acre pari: site is planned near the center of the site. Fill will be required to raise the development area above present flood level elevations. At this tine, the fill thickness �•vill vary from approximately 6 feet at the southwest to less than l Boot at the northeast ends of the site. Since the existing grades are near the street elevations, we anticipate that oradirlg consist of' inor cuts and fills necessary to achieve level building pads and positive site drainage. Response to COA#18(c) We are addressing COA 18 (c), creation of a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (G1-IAD). This measure calls for the establishment of a GRAD to fund maintenance of certain site improvements; however, the specific improvements to be covered and GIJAD responsibilities are not defined. As discussed in the project geotechnical report, the primary geologic hazards at the site are the presence of discontinuous zones or pockets of loose sand that may liquefy and density during an earthquake and the settlement of' soft compressible soils. These geologic hazards will be mitigated during site grading thl-OL1 11 the implementation ole in-place compaction and placement of surcharge fill, as noted below: • Selected building lots will be SUIchau-ged to reduce post-construction settlement and fLicilitate the use of structural mat foundations. • A soil densification program will be implemented to reduce the potential Por licjuefaction-induced (Iround failure at the site. ® 1.3uried utilities will be designed to accommodate the estimated total and diftercntial settlement. I lexible connections should be used utilities transition through 11x1/Ci11entS and slabs. l"ollowing mitigation, the project grading will render.the site relatively level. The majority of the site will be developed Lind include individual landscaped home sites, public streets and a small park area. No open space and/or off-site slopes that are typically associated with GI-lAD functions are planned. Wildcat Creel: borders the site to the south; however. as discussed in the project geotechnical report, the proposed development is not expected to impact the creel:. Pavement and utilit)l improvements and concrete flatwork associated- with the project development may experience displacement in a seismic event as described in the ,eotechillcal report; hovwever, these Conditions are typical of developments throughout the Bay Area that are exposed to differential settlement and/or seismic conditions. There Pore, because the project is Signature Properties 6127.1.002.02 Nove Property January 19, 2007 GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT Pate 3 not expected to impact the adjacent creek, and because the geologic hazards discussed in the geotechnical report will be mitigated as pari of site grading, it is our opinion that the establishment of a GI-IAD to provide post-construction maintenance functions is not required. Maintenance of project stormwater detention and water quality facilities as part of the project development, as well as mitigation or abatement of hazards related to. on-site differential settlement, should appropriately be addressed through the planned Home Owners Association (HOA) for the project. For these reasons, we do not recommend the establishment of a GRAD for this project as a mitigation measure for potential ground instability impacts. We look forward to continuing our work with you on this project. If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, ENGEO INCORPO QR FESSi4 'L GE 2094 _ v' m Donald E. Brugge ,Ij�P,12/31�d7 i -liahu, U� deb/jb:ghad P%,F� CHN��P��e