The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 10072008 - D.2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ' Contra FROM: Catherine Kutsuris, Director Costa Department of Conservation & DevelopmentCounty DATE: October 7, 2008 SUBJECT: HEARING ON A REZONING FROM A-40, EXCLUSIVE AGRICULTURAL TO P-1, PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT '� WITH A VARIANCE TO MINIMUM AREA FOR NON RESIDENTIAL USE (4.9 ACRES WHERE 10 ACRES REQUIRED) AND APPROVAL OF A 4 PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT AN ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 1711 SELLERS AVENUE IN THE BRENTWOOD AREA. (EAST CONTRA COSTA IRRIGATION DISTRICT (ECCID) - APPLICANT & OWNER) (COUNTY FILE #'s RZ073192, DP073050) (DISTRICT 111). SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. RECOMMENDATIONS After accepting any public testimony and closing the public hearing: 1. FIND the Negative Declaration prepared for this project to be adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and ADOPT the Negative Declaration. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X ;--YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON (� dOLI Y,&&APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER � , V TE OF SUPERVISORS �, I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND 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:John Oborne 925 335-1207 ATTESTED cc: Department of Conservation and Development(DCD) DAVID TWA, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS East Contra Costa Irrigation District(Owner) AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR City of Brentwood County Administrator's Office Clerk of the Board County Counsel ` BY PUTY Public Works Department File October 7, 2008 Board of Supervisors File# RZ07-3192 &#DP07-3050 Page 2 2. ACCEPT the recommendation of the East County Regional Planning Commission, as contained in Resolution No. 16-2008, which is attached as Exhibit#2. 3. ADOPT the Rezoning (County File #RZ07-3192) redesignating the property from A-40 (Exclusive Agricultural) to P-1 (Planned Unit District) with a variance to the minimum area for nonresidential use (4.9 acres, where 10 acres are required), as shown in Exhibit 2, APPROVE the.Preliminary and Final Development Plan with attached conditions (refer to Exhibit 3), and ADOPT Ordinance No. 2008-10 giving effect to the aforementioned Rezoning as recommended by the East County Regional Planning Commission. 4. DIRECT the Community Development Division to post the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. II. . FISCAL IMPACT-. None. The applicant is responsible for application processing costs. III. BACKROUND& REASON FOR RECOMMENDING APPROVAL A. Background and Purpose of Existing Structures on the.Property In 2004 the East Contra Costa Irrigation District (the District) embarked on a project to relocate a portion of its existing;,Operation and Maintenance Center from its location on the District's main canal property approximately 2,000 feet east of Sellers Avenue to a wider portion of the canal property west of Sellers Avenue, where it is now located. Under Government Code Section 53091 (e), which exempts public utilities from local zoning ordinances for construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water, the District obtained a building permit from the County and constructed what is currently on the site, a 9,500 square foot Operation and Maintenance building. The sole purpose of the project was to provide a more efficient and safer work environment for District staff, which provides services to the agricultural community. As a result of that project, the District was able to 'abandon existing substandard structures, a substandard wastewater disposal system and a substandard domestic well system. B. Background of Current Application In early 2007, the District approached the County because they wanted to add an administration building to the site so that they could consolidate their administrative and agriculture support functions, which currently are housed in a small office on one site in Brentwood. The District was directed to -apply for a rezoning from A-40 to P-1 and a preliminary and final development,plan for an administration building with related off-street parking. October 7, 2008 Board of Supervisors File# RZ07-3192 &#DP07-3050 Page.3 C. Rezoning The applicant proposes to rezone the project site from Exclusive Agricultural, A-40, to Planned Unit District, P-1, with the approval of a preliminary and final development plan for an administration building and related parking facilities. While it may appear that an additional building, placed on, an existing, developed site would be appropriate, the original project, combined with the new proposal, could be considered precedent setting in allowing intrusion into a protected agricultural area. This project is located within an area designated in the General Plan as Agricultural Core (AC). The types of uses allowed in the AC are limited. It is a category established to, protect one of the few remaining prime agricultural zones in the County. As such,"the area'is intended for use that is directed exclusively toward . the production of food, fiber, and plant materials. As to the clarification regarding the intent of the General Plan for the Agricultural Core, the Department has concluded that the project is consistent with the General Plan based on a number of factors including that the project involves limited acreage, supports agricultural production, is a unique use �as an agricultural irrigation support facility, and does not encourage non-agricultural growth in the area. If this project involved a greater expansion of the use of prime agricultural land, or had other significant impacts to the Agricultural Core, the Department's finding would not have been supportive. This is to say, that any future proposals that would go beyond the current "envelope" that encloses the current project site would be subject to additional scrutiny and there would be a high probability of a finding of non-compliance with the General Plan. D. Final Development Plan Concurrent with the process of the rezoning application, the applicant is also requesting approval of a Preliminary and Final Development Plan to construct a 3,292 square foot, one- story administration building, two carports (2,160 square feet and 720 square feet), with a 3,750 square foot enclosed garage for District vehicles. There is an existing two story 9,500 square.foot building that houses the operation and maintenance functions of the District that are necessary to deliver water to their customers (See Preliminary and Final Development Plan attached as exhibit 7). E. East County Regional Planning Commission Hearing The East County Regional Planning Commission held a'public hearing to consider the proposed project on June 9, 2008. The applicant's engineer was in attendance at the meeting. After considering the proposal, the Commission added a condition of approval (#1 A) that stipulated that the proposed administration building for ECCID approved by this permit could not be leased for another use in the future. The Commission then recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve the rezoning and preliminary and final development plan (County File #'s"RZ07-3192 & DP07-3050)with this modification. October 7, 2008 Board of Supervisors File#RZ07-3192 &#DP07-3050 Page 4 EXHIBITS 1. General Plan Map, Vicinity Map & Rezoning Map 2. East County Regional Planning Commission Resolution No. 16-2008 & Findings Map 3. Conditions of Approval for P07-3050 4. June 9, 2008 Staff Report for East County Regional Planning Commission 5. Pertinent Correspondence, Response to applicant from County regarding General Plan compliance of project. 6. CEQA Determination / Negative Declaration 7. Preliminary and Final Development Plan 8. Notification List GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Board\Board Orders\RZ073192.BO.JVO.doc c - ADDENDUM D.2 October 7, 2008 Preliminary & Final Development Plan and Rezoning for Construction of Administration Building, East Contra Costa Irrigation District Catherine Kutsuris, Conservation and Development Department Director, presented the staff report. Supervisor Piepho noted that the East County Regional Planning Commission approved the recommendations, with the restriction that the District would not lease the facility to any other user. Supervisor Piepho requested that the restriction include a provision not to sell the property to another entity that involved a non-agricultural operation. Ms. Kutsuris said the permit condition language could be amended to require that prior to the sale of the property, the District must apply for modification of the Preliminary and Final Development Plans to ensure that any future.use will be consistent with the agricultural.core of the area, and to further clarify that the permit is issued under the provision that it is for an agricultural use for a public agency. Chair Glover opened the public hearing. There were no requests to speak on the matter. Chair Glover closed the hearing. By unanimous vote, with Supervisor Uilkema absent, the Board ADOPTED the recommendations presented with the inclusion of the additional language proposed by Ms. Kutsuris. J Exhibit -1 General Plan Map Vicinity Map Rezoning Map �-A�-"-n..w.> ! ti ,�ti�tt Fflri I�-s" Ral'�i- f^. .,._ �"•#.—' _—_ OSSIN [ Rt -x. �7i�a.".t'ri��,,.s"t') ,� r •�:��r' _` �^ � f �r All. `,"'`•�k��tt�-- 1 i9Y_ �'��'r -•7�{a ^{y,�r��c IA1A e � � �'r ��.:� i } FLS afi 'C-�'r� 'j .E [ 1.rrc�yE Ot�r� • • D ml MEI t3- 1 110( �„.+�-tt`: - F,ti,x �• ` rai , ,^fir ,�! �,,,�s�T+ra� ,,�. y'aa� mv�,...L �°�'' � � / trI o° ,. ��' r i i ••oi. + �,a �. ,�'.�:."' ..�--•-�=. u .'M�� i:�r iii .- ��J> h t :. 7•z••-rr� c." �rti�}yr 41 3 t d G t'.,. _ R A A �� 1 w f �,•.-. #t e i X' ;�, Eb;t tt + 'f- �/� � �;��i�ii�hi��i ' s�'4 ,�,•d•.-r ",$„t., `* r.t ,.l '� � �ttrtt� t;�yr is ��,e��• �k 'i "'•� � :' •• '�J..x .,a JCK `'�''��,1 �:�i � � s�z*�.'f'�{�� 1 tGY��S T �h }� s „/.' ��.- � ° .. �■ lt�a i+il)��`i' '<g"• +�"F5s ::n� sf, r� _-p�]]j'.J t�m'/.k.ro, �a ��3��k: t �� ^, ; , � � r // f#, ja€.R'r µu` • �' L ' t;�99at'q ,4-z�tkFr' r.�i - ].'.1" �� ,�, ,+-fit 5+ o t � '•�'I° ' `"...,�4'a � ,�T}�'+rr�, a r�,'� t�?� � � / ' ■ �Ilf 11 vi € ,�,ytk ` � r K, ..x vv ��I"�n'3'" fr4��-,�.�,n •.`�. �..� , _ � . �■ '�'N'' �'+ac �'� G�.--fes�r;�fi�,'r:' � i'��r ? " ■ �a E � �1�i'`-hr�..t_i# '{�fi•ra>. u 7 r, .i i r � �•S =�, � �/! ..t�� r. _ � � �� +v v t f t t ��) y;`iy/`o .�T;� _ 0 ..� . � /. .■ fs� J r,'ry3.xFlf);}:n EY#�� ,� S li , y*e,.: .wv., s.° • N{` tr� !t /� .• o �� / .. �■ 1 1t �i G I T r at f t e t�,r>,f + � - '` '� � sy7A��,e •, � n _ A■ / I •• j�[i`�f aih�i��•�,}.5,-�--sclt j+x �If!'�Ii �c �� r a fr � i ....`.F'�x� � a ■■ ��, l,1' 8€� bl{t! , u / i �,« L f i h 1F.3-u.+. - � �•/ l\/ /■ F ti" #l u ty 1t� t 7 ■fir'_. p s� .rl.. '�'��,�ri#' R .- h .'i` ...J�r '� { �,,•� � ■ � Ali �! �'1EI., t-I!�`Nx�`i�•+v�,r-.ai�, i"t;• � r��f t �r; m �f �+ �„ � t�:..: � �■■/aa■Aa■/ ■. 2� �- sem •.,,.vim � ��lr. �•� # '� ;��h ��A j�"` � ": r.�• ''!x'� y,'�-� �tl �.x�� 't` .r� .A�� 1E,4�`.�o-�L �,f i i•a� Yi-.� K. �: -. Y �.ae ,s .> -,s1iY C !y4 �i�. a4 � Flu C F 3 i `�j.� fn A.rX-'� -� 3��§�,` - • t+�z `�.' J�"�°2P�t, �t tf i � � ,+s � `�� j� F'.� �z ,..d�:� ,'tL�=.� �,L � fa:, rn t - ^a• �,�. s. 3•-•��-�''h� '�-� -a� :4�.. x�� 5:rf '�:-•� `,.^�T ��-. �7 - ur'_ .6``3c-_ � - � h 7'a" �•rr��r g'? tt'N �� ;lu r r ;�. , i �3 �� ,, r t • • t "fxs 1t t§,• � �. 3E �,� �•v`�' K�1{��S r�'�rtk��-3 XP • r� 1t ; aM .3x � Y/ .tlt � .� asst - _ „s'C { ��71 .� �}, � ..tt l�'rL�W'i v x !i�E? 'p i• - > 3. z i _� ,.-r-, ,y,dn�' �'� � ,•YA.�v r��i" • ..�`�jc�§ t'� }fi .*,. ..,'. 4 � 4 .S a"n .f,5 3c .r1 ��^ftE .-, �fYi'rRt�''a.� o t ,.'��J"' ,.��f�xY°�t rta�tlrfy, {-t7�.4+ *- � ��:;t ��` s - � #�� ...4 `t • ti. +��i� r�.f�?'r•[i`g�t��34�r Y w y • ° ,,.y� �`� � }�� «.� Fk• kms. '� 3 ��fs� � ;'+� �'.- _ �' i, �+ .. ij?t5vS4' �? �i1...±yE--wsb s fir. r-�:a h �� r �•ih � f ' Toa NAT {Jk� „thy.' �9a. ` -;4 '>3 a� • 1' • ,�•A�� t+li4 tiY�e a=. "t'^ ��;q..�� A i �-k'ti#7�� ,..>t + ,�t{�.t+P-r.�� x k�< t. - rt:.. :i �}i'.f�v�q�'Y�La�,�`r�a��'�.�r'.t'�r��+'v'pp�'�1:'.,r:fr-s•L�q�'.°�+r �i�,('�y.`£�h.l � � f-fir•: , u �,h,« -'��tr' `� � �� '� ``�`d-� ,,~t� "„�a t �� t` P� � �t .* d f _ s,'t� � wID^ a• 'T�j ��t`� .A"i{,1• '. ,,��, •+3a, � �'�Ft v..,h g ,c �r - - t�"r n�'r?.kt� �. - t s i,.. s zy: �.3��'-iy ^'yr��. _�,• .. �SZ'3��#`�..�k. ��,x ri¢'!*"t�d 5+.`�� gXi. "�+.z�4t'�*' � �� . �/ Asa- '� �` �'Z�try13��r,�1•,•t,�v}4� �'. ..°•, e•c ti.s"� '"'3 A+F �%.t - 7 �• -�t� � �'�"+"�-a x P��.{ th'r i:4 z �' � r �� Y � "� �Tj€ rpt r'?wlr�" t�K t j� �4�18+•"''f^r Fa' :- ��3.,'.�3. 3. �pT•e� .+i .�_ �,"'�� i a s'�6h k'+�'` "+1rcd � t�—ic'e a��,� s � � a .& r:»n.S � �'�, �y�c£ i� l a ,��+ �„� a -.,« �to�`�.-�.8 ? .�► ry " 3 i.Ti O '� �r x ,�M 3 � � Wri ht'1Na Hudson Dr eD ' t c a !} w. �- Y� `J cn z,x t5 4 �, + �t*'�s- •A4 �h a.>? c v ch .« cCD to 32� �c as 4" _q s XDm 7 4FY M N I p n--"»y-x g a t a r k t a }e vt 41 CD rNN SAT i arc i3 .� t j 4- x q e° r r t , 1r tc 1 i). \ • G r, /�uthrie Ln Gann_, {-`� •,C 6 �s �`St��.f 4k`hr.�+..-q�s�, s�,��r��„� �, `s� �� 5� o brT-'t` 'N 5 J1 9 -� �{�K� �d a� .a �� 3 •� �t 1 � ,L'°C� ` � ! TraditiontWay hqs Guise-MayC� k �' y� a Heritage-Way zs a ^+r Al,'z, y 1 ..4 vd� *<`,€ `rhe g 'y4 t- kv - •. k g,' $= G• y '� �.�; � I y,n "�� ?' - � - � R 1 3�..P �1� ", � '� 4,}. '°��i - t ,M .x sa Ys�° m K: .z.W' � •? _. �. h11' . i! C * n �4 '�.x.t +err 8� t � a..• t :`€ �� !'��3a'.ei 4 �. 1*,�..+ -tr,- � �� iµ�g v car Y� t a -a` Y 7 3 r • y r� h� +� i fie�.z.�rFt F i Tx a:ga. !k Fxa z. re •t €r":` f 4 " vr3 rn� a-z.. d.. qtr` S•'€ '��s..'� �s`r"�h; m:, +F ,�+.at-. ... � �y g. ® ,?r° �t i„ ..cc .- ' A t ""t t -rt r 4 e "e a + xl ?, ' 'Z .� r r• - ?� u 5 sIh$ Y" S` 4 •, } <. >`,,s sa a +, •ta} a '� dyz. ,H r, )' ,�• N + 'z,.f-_ 3 C s r g.4�' :,;•# t `'a ..,r¢ +,✓'^ a'. trY3 � r�3 `° �e 3i� �: p� Fd• �s r n,.f 3 .:5'° wr ", %a�• x at>'•� T} i t..Ys s E �w. J "�,^ s z i c ¢ e, '2 m 1,.• �.i3 7€ v� �'"�y,a.� ? i.. y 1 . m. 1 t!t1 2,,u.s�` ,.:€ .r *i +' - t�7�+ P,";g * - d 4 »p S Sl. ��S tg "1.• E t?.,i� 1 �. ..£ f� ``i.� } 1 s W iq� c� #t W4 a sz +..v. SPA -t �;_� t -.� �< -_ -..._3 p }k � f F�.`�'fi J fis'�'s y. +' f$ T� N -l� `x' tO )5,.. ..� _`' c`" r' t F ia... x' Ey * �' '.pb `J+r 1l,r �.ry, .�, '"'` kF.s7` o- 1 3 '�"•sir f3 1 v x AV zs a ,k �FyZ�Ys `e F,t 1C� x y n fis .r� fru 4 1' c 7 -� m :C 9•!er3 J � 3'� � i �'� :L'1 a'� E -4.Rf4� '3" �y �t �s d.- 4 i�' Y 5i � d' f' . z�." 'c. tet.,ar a ,ss# "-' $';�£_ . 1 sn' k. r• {"+,. z d `' `* :P ' >: - d,'i >w t i $ r .. a 5 .-�,�, � X1�- 3� ", .'#c2r t : 'j5-t T•s a+h{ s 4_ � 5 L � �k,2� y.--•y,a' � y -�` � y.e�`�� R�}� t '� ixr�'c P.c.� i yrs 5 Ts -,+�.;� -T� t` � �� 'E'� � '� t � se :i Ea c; ,{,E m 1 sri-•u4't" e'rt+''f 3r 's..-4 0 - -1 ''ff. r.a F { Y +�'' t �vf• i� `! � - �c...t.: » ;� �._ � a,... �4✓_ -,Z�di��4e..f9,» .3�' c' a t' f' � �'� m n �� (x- r *we�q ed�'S��`� '��,1£! v Y-.�.�!�'Fa` 'x��G'" i • • �� 7 �iii �.� � 4 � i`thY �` t E +1� � • ls — x-.__ %fidy .3 aa4 v iff'•x` , y. v 3 F� s �7 �" '� Gia �: � difit �' ,e �� .,p� c., r - ,,r- l'r' a'q*" � �4 S)r•��'� s'M1 v �S•Sr--yrK � k a „��i�.r xr�,.,,��.'� ,�a .,,... �� ,f� »"Y�- �•g�- T ,t r �� fi � {�l` t:. rFs�t y: „r "!'y�' "'�. b..J•�.a �` ,:f�.; �� '� .�' ��;�` :'r@'r.r,��"' cad'a's„y�•�rx-`. ��>f-k �'3� �.,.''..,r.`rs�i ��,�y��'h�^.�Y�fi h-...�,��`��t��t��''� �€��`4"t:�{ �� r � t�,. c• � r..k f- ��'�� fr-ts xv n �#� 'i5 4 ++ E5 r p+� �x iF.,'k, x C <'� e 'NY. �� 6 ,.r.`�''�� Vii" '� `�.r�' � '� 1`k^T Wit'��.,,'' Esq,:�� f�-¢" A,",�•�� :�� 3$Cx�K. --� �`� ��..k�,. �,�h.+sr� :..- x ' ��' dq � �f gi fi4��•'x�.9�� Yrs��.��'`.��.�w'� lF��it��2��`k�4�i-�$ �4��sS��s�Yt-y�, '" ��fn�"`* `5r ';,�., !' �� _.. �, - Uzi` j-+iv+ iT'�, �^�' � r�`s•>r� � `r • .s. -+'�'�i �� 4� r a'�-, �-�� .` • Ful'h r.. fi"3 c ',�•y7ks�."L`.4 y: �� f' �x��, { `gL a:d} ��! x'.$t'`Y Lra'i'�s i r °�, i a 4.,.d# '...; ,��t.,�'"!e:><rr's '!�,�„�.. �"'`.'�ea�¢�p'�.�� }�g. �-.a�.'� "� � �`�k..'� •��'��;�!`�{''`��,�'�._�h1� .�X ?.Ec.�,,.�5,.rr� t .a.�-� �,l �� .sµ;�?i�-r'�' �F�s�. ''+a� i, � h a. `�--i.= � AS.§, �JS'}c "{. t`.h�'� ?• a.h%``'�;� l j �:.v y 3 r,.;�J y�..�af4 �it' 4- �5 `T 3--'a., 'yv �x'F� ry �ra. aG"cr r- � t xr '�ca:• - :R"� v'1�,t�a r f C,�,2 ,� �� y ^1y r.,3u r 3�+ ,e.• - rte` i•au e i '4.` '� ,�� :• ,,t�. '�� ,J7;` �y�� R.+fi � �'�ty��.;! "'� � � t;s� � '�� xat ss q�i�"-•s"U':,_+„� a�"�a�.ti w ��"`}...7x�'. �,�''= -.c-.�t sa��i'`�rt •��,r .y� ��4��. ��,x:� �� `?� ,..Ss` xi'�„�r�t` "' �:,��` i �`�v. G � •��-,��fi r a. ._ € nt' ;F'.'. 1 '�• x � rlwix�`� �$is�-�^I g � �'��i.d � 4a.. .+*: $ -...��-, Middlefield Ct Guthrie Ln Fahmy Sl cfilior�Way CL Sellers Ave Middlefield Cl Gulhrie Ln y st lg ��. Tradition _I • � t �e .s 4N CL I. •1 C mat" :.+�aC. ! Sellers Ave �� _ �4` ��. t�� -�-.�.�-rn. F�� '�M a 9r .`�.�'��sr��''� "�• `t,.��Tt+-,ry'-eit s �, r$ t as`�'�`4�'® �� l!p ' '� Y a X' • ,z ` ?r'"1�r"`��-y'� ',-H -. �� s�s '�'H� �`�,.t9'•,,�+ #'� t`' x�r '��' Fav �� .� � s�•, �-n � ..f,—q7 � 4��.'�+� t�'�"��-c IN ��''��`i� rN 5.M, • ;;'" �. � s � 'f� ��„„� 3,:Ca r��4 Ns°', �r�� 'ri# 'r.��'�� ..e'� �as,; xer�.'��-� � r`• �y'7�pxy�R. �•+e wk2 a� _ v'�Y, 1r..L,� ��"� ha s,�*�,-G''J �. .s' C fi3 rr'w a+'�,F.c* `-!",. Fyv��''� .. ��;� a•,ts • .��; c� .+ 5. F ,+`. ;..,t�+L'�- a *�r,,�*5 y�i-t�„i „E.3 x`y, d*• ,v ds�A`, _ SM, k� + � ry r� � • .izs � _r� � ;'. � �`. �. �$ .. �j=�''v �� `` ,��r!.',�;�`v,��-°'Cpl`' 'fid'' .� -. `� .� � c .�, � ::• � �. '�`- "�� _ s,'sh�,�.,.. ,...ate 4 •'` +.`,�. rj' .,+y�it ..3t. 'air'T�,'' ' �� t4., �"tr,". , �} IN . j_ .Z7 Y:.1{..tr5.s':0..:4 1• i'1pI fit- �. IY J--^^^i"t Q� y,'f'. y� •Y4.,�:..y-/- .`�-^'\ � R + � � \�` (?I �r-.--.� Hsoudsn or oo # }a a �{�°cir:=n ;^ tcxyf,'�._} N .c''. �y \�,,,•,i YO �r� 'fid• 00 CD HUM�:gsec � •�' i of i t, � lD 9 .s is �Rffi°'� 3 / ±s•T y..,r.ar " Ir•$ ; ycr• �•• ,dp (D -0 n re a!i ktisj� f't•}j.,l}•. i ?.` fD Jn f Im �,,. AN,R � .. > "IJ FFF- ?�{� ksd4t: 111�y , 14 '�-�rr+,i'# ��{1�1?r'�'. t �'�,.j11� f r c*,ye �• Q •.,� � �'.�i '�=/ � �raaltlOn..,�WBY 1' ;w�y.x` }•},yr' -c��f �'tt t` x' J zIx N ! :# tLAI,' :. s #[ ' tea Heritage Way cn '•� t;r,{'^+''.. 3 7�'�- `! �' �•�;��' ' � r�f�'� 'k�'� j i��,;;5." i��.+`•: .{ ' Panorama Way ` # �If wwFi ,.: , t i Sellers Ave .ar y� � `- .r';-•"� r ,..# tLl - � � �� _ •.'fit' I -'1 ch (C't r rrt J, aC c' i �5 ` t on ;� x ME N E�.a '.t K s t� 't-.a"',,rr;;.-v ... z• ova os { S t } .• •'�} t 11 kA'5.�� G� cv C7 Biu n Dr GR` 5 t f ��` W N N•t i ul n \ c0 a Q CD CD o y,, co 7o C 7_ a �n� 4 cairn CD ` ® n0N1aY t? 1t11 . 'rad �� c,Uis ay p �oo� � Panorama W . p � t p LOP a Cts i { t 1/ t $i Qi S�. ti9 ll o Ti i��'" u T $cc 3. S iSil , Middlefield Ct 0 s s g T Guthrie Ln �q 0 > r ra/ z i..._ __ ._ ,. ._._._ _ i � •� t ' P.il� Fahmy St � 40 I !�- @a• Tradlfroa Wap �} �0y11`y�. 8 t ® c Guise Way fpt •� I r 'j b Heritage Way n �~ 4� m CPanorama WayIF — y iI' /If Sellers Ave x;• C fD • sa�n 4" pJ ,R upnswad 11, y (i � Middlefield Ct Q K I m O Guthrie Ln (D FahmSt t Tradition Way Guise Way Q t (i {� n M m. - T+ a Heritage Way S 't cx K C N N Panorama Way d (O —Al'G "t Sellers Ave m CL q rnNO C) o 3 3 M N. M, U) (a i � it r Exhibit 2 East County Regional Planning Commission Resolution No. 16-2008 Ordinance No. 2008-10 Findings Map RESOLUTION NO 16-2008 RESOLUTION OF THE EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE REQUESTED REZONING AND PRELIMINARY AND .FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN THE BRENTWOOD AREA OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, EAST CONTRA COSTA. IRRIGATION DISTRICT (ECCID) (Applicant & Owner) has proposed to construct a 3,296 square foot administration building with associated off-street parking facilities on a 4.2 lacre parcel (APN 010-190-007) for which an application was received by the Community Development Division.on July 3, 2007; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines an initial study was conducted and a Negative Declaration was prepared ; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2008 the County published a Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration, which Notice recited the foregoing facts, and started a period for public comments on adequacy of the environmental documents related to the Project that ran for a 20 day comment period; and WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the East County Regional Planning Commission on June 9, 2008, during which the Commission fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the East County Regional Planning Commission ("this Commission")takes the following actions: 1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines and the County's CEQA Guidelines (together, "CEQA"), this Commission FINDS that the proposed Negative Declaration is adequate for the purposes of compliance with CEQA. In support of these actions and conclusions, this Commission ADOPTS the CEQA findings. This Commission adopts these findings specifically for each of the Approvals and Entitlements it approves or recommends for approval for the Project. 2. This 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 recommendations, determinations 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 CEQA. 3. Recommends to the Board of Supervisors APPROVAL of the proposed Rezoning (County File #RZ073192), changing the zoning designation of the subject site from A-40 Exclusive Agricultural to P-1 Planned Unit District, with a variance to allow application of the P-1 district for a non-residential development involving less than 10 acres. 4. Recommends to the Board of Supervisors APPROVAL of the proposed Preliminary and Final Development Plan.(County.File #DP073050) subject to the conditions of approval for this project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for these recommendations are as follows: FINDINGS 1. RezoningFindings A. Required Finding: The change proposed will substantially comply with the General Plan. Project Finding: The site has a General Plan designation of Agricultural Core and is currently zoned Exclusive Agricultural. The only other zoning district that is consistent with the Agricultural Core General Plan designation and that might allow the proposed uses is the Planned Unit District (P-1). To bring the zoning of the site into compliance with the General Plan the applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning to Planned Unit District. B. Required Finding: The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible within the district and with uses authorized in adjacent districts. Project Finding: The applicant proposes to rezone the project site from Exclusive Agricultural, A-40, to Planned Unit District, P-1, with the approval of a preliminary and final development plan for an administration building and related facilities. This project is located within an area designated in the General Plan as Agricultural Core (AC). The types of uses allowed in the AC are very limited. It is a category established to protect one of the few remaining prime agricultural zones in the county. As such, the area is intended for use that is directed exclusively toward the production of food,fiber, and plant materials. As to the clarification regarding the intent of the General Plan for the Agricultural Core the County has made the following interpretation: since this project is for a public agency, involves limited acreage, supports agricultural production, even though not directly an element of production, is a unique and extraordinary use. as an agricultural irrigation support facility, and has limited impact in terms of transit effects, or encouraging non-agricultural growth in the area, our finding is that this project is in compliance with the intent of the General Plan, in relation to the text and intentions, regarding areas that have been designated Agricultural Core (AC). If this Page 2 project involved a greater expansion of the use of prime agricultural land, or had other significant impacts to the Agricultural Core, the County's finding would have been for non-compliance. This is to say, that any future proposals that would go beyond the current "envelope" that encloses the current project site would be subject to the greatest scrutiny and there would be a high probability of a finding of non-compliance with the General Plan. C. Required Finding: Community need has been demonstrated for the use proposed, but this does not require demonstration of future financial.success. Project Finding: The proposed use will serve as the primary administration office for the East Contra Costa Irrigation District, which is the water supply provider for the 12,000-acre agricultural area surrounding Brentwood and Knightsen. III. Final Development Plan Findings 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 intends to start construction within two and one-half years from the effective date of the zoning change and plan approval. B. Required Finding: The proposed planned unit development is consistent .with the County General Plan. Project Finding: The project site has a General Plan designation of Agricultural Core (AC). The proposed planned unit development is consistent with the General Plan as explained in I B of these findings. 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. Project Finding: The proposed project does not contain residential development. D. Required Finding: The development of a harmonious, integrated plan justifies exceptions from the normal application of this code. Project Finding. The project as conditioned will harmoniously integrate a proposed administration building and related parking with an existing maintenance and operation building. E. Required Variance Findings for the application of P-1 District for non-residential development involving less than 10 acres. Page 3 Proiect Finding: The special circumstance applicable to the subject property is its location and surroundings in that it involves limited acreage, supports agricultural production, even though not directly an element of production is a unique and extraordinary use as an agricultural support facility surrounded by agricultural use. WHEREAS, at the June 9, 2008 hearing the Commission added a condition of approval as follows: 1 a. The administration building for the East County Irrigation District established by this land use permit shall not be sublet for a different use. NOW BE IT 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. This Resolution was approved upon motion of the East County Regional Planning Commission on Monday, June 9, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: MacVittie, Day, Stevenson, Hanna NOES:None ABSENT: Pigati ABSTENTIONS: None Chair of the East County Regional Planning Commission County of Contra Costa, State of California ATTEST: Catherine Kutsuris, Secretary. County of Contra Costa State of California GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Board\Resolutions\RZ073192.Findings.JVO.doc Page 4 Findings Map X,, I - 0\)City City of ids A-4 Bre ntwood d A-2 *k2 A-2 I ° ® E +p Church.Rd � /// A-40 �. %\ e. V\ A-40 ---Eureka"Ave �� @\ --- �\\ Rezone from 'A-40 to P-1 ® Brentwood Area L Walter MacVittie Chair of the East County Regional Planning Commission, State of California do hereby certify.that this is a true and correct copy of page M-26 of the County's 2005 zoning map. indicating thereon the decision of the East County Regional Planning Commission in the matter of East Contra Costa Irrigation District- RZ 073192 ATTEST: Secretary of the East County Regional Planning Commission, State of Calf. J . ORDINANCE NO. 2008 - 10 (Re-Zoning Land in the Brentwood Area) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: SECTION I: Page M-26 of the County's 2005 Zoning Map (Ord. No. 2005-03) is amended by re-zoning the land in the above area shown shaded on the ma.ps)attached hereto and incorporated herein (see also Community Development Department File No. KL - 073192 ) FROM: Land Use District A-40 ( Exclusive Agricultural ) TO: Land Use District P-1 ( Planned Unit District ) and the Community Development Director shall change the Zoning Map accordingly, pursuant to Ordinance Code Sec. 84.2.002. yi31, -A A-4 `c'ty of fl.--- \ _ i u t `\� f fl KDr ®t11 BrentwoodIL !u fl .oe =-ec��a �. �--Chu rchRd/ fl N A-4 A \ X L—A-40— A�40vi I d i � j SECTION II. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days of passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for and against it in the ---d54 '(kiwi-fu 7eS a newspaper published in this County. PASSED on /d -07 j?y the following vote: Supervisor Ave No Absent Abstain 1. J. Gioia 04 ( ) ( ) ( ) 2. G.B. Uilkema 3. M.N. Piepho 4. S. Bonilla 64 ( ) ( ) ( ) 5. F.D. Glover ( ) ( ) ( ) ATTyClerke lien, Count 'Administrator ce.Yl. andd of Su ' rs Chairman Tof the Board * o� By Dep. (SEAL) ORDINANCE NO. 2008 - 10 RZ073192- East Contra Costa Irrigation District 1 Exhibit 7 Preliminary and Final Development Plan L Exhibit 3 Conditions of Approval for DP07-3050 rr{/ �> - I �co z n � I __ __ —— __ �,,, S00'09'36•W 479.77— _ — — � _ —.— _— � i 6 N p T I { Nm i >cr I Ze I o 1 i �. 21Y u� 1 Z2 I � I I i r m #m liI 1 m� 25' 16`• y cziI 290.54' - z :� n I i HaP, I N1 D n x g s> z 1 iq P^ ^� ao n— I D — SELLERS AVENUE ti NAS e� ECCID ADMINISTRATION BUILDING DP 07-3050 h Y4D°"9 `"d DmloVwd Er4,.wrq DEMNE1 UNDER THE DIRECTION OF: Q0.0EESS1 NO. REVISIONS 8Y ARR PRELIM. & FINAL DEVELOPMENT PIAN '°"F°"°"`°°°' — '$YiII 100 MIGliAEL E.units OAIE 1�110C34 C0f1COfti. 'u 94520 R.C,E.-35121 REGIS-AnONEXPn1ESSM3 ¢ Na.15.25.� A PROPOSED SITE PLAN NIILANIw.(925)874-9082 DES GN:JJ9 J76 N0: 2501.3W 'W.09/f0/09 Fac(925)874-9279 DRAWN:8M CiAiE OaR7oA8 �tf or COLA{ t BRENTWOOD CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA mido E*..kw•Cal*UCUM Std*q•QrAft bn MMOM A CHECKED:MEM =9v XH181TS\EXH18tT003.dwg 4-04-08 10:15:00 AM jsheen ------ ------- 0 oI 0 F 0 0 to m ED S 03 L al Z F o 0 F-1 ru ri ol O z t 8 1 A 4 m z Z\� 4 (D (D L M X > I F(D \ 4W (D Ll let: TEEA C, A 1014, 2" i, W-10, PI 2 P T > (D om f: d77TI, 7v z o x m ROOF OVER"N& 5-io, 20'-2" 20'-2' fA,-O. q'-o- cI GISTPPRO ECT: TITLE. MIKE SMITH PROPOSED ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOR: FLOOR PLAN - OFFICE ENGINEERING, INC. EAST CONTRA 005TA IRRIGATION DISTRICT 4 NORTH MAIN STREET PROJECT LOCATION; LOD], CAWORNIA 95240 NA 1111 5ELLER5 AVENUE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PHONE (209) 334-2332 BRENTWOOD,CALIFORNIA DEVELOPMENT PLAN 108 so 2££Z-4S£ (602) MOMN*lcl 1N9Wd0laAMG VfINa0:41-lvO'000M1N3a9 of m Ymaodwo 'tg0't 1"1=1 aNNV AN*NIN113Nd 3nrt3nv S-627-lag 111-1 140I1vOO-1173('O24d IS�s�T,t.sz�raTv��r77trr��i��7�HOM r7v 10I21151Q N011bOIZI'�!I � wig 1� �g .ILMI `DNI8�7�7).`iIDNR _ O X3 Od 9 aling N0l.LV*tLLLsINijW O GI21SOdOa3 �01dd0 �aN01'd/\3'i� 21 1131 a ,o3b3 st�3�,si RIMS SHIN 3111 1��road �{ Onrl m A lu - w m n ml h NMI \ `..,., 31 ," \\ \�\ 15,R "i M; ..._................ .....i....,,r I ` =T: f Ul W S� ---------------------_-------- _________, --" _________ ------- � D > I , I u rt ' r ' Q1 ,tom# HLNIIaIJHI1Ht#HII3L1}IJttaH#I3{NHMINNHNNJI©uNI11tu iYH{aYY YI.HNu1NNIMY11113NYHItf#MITI{Ia.iYN INIINNI iJ1}iNF-- , t p , ; zi I I b z b , i i I Y}Lu}„L}.t#„t},#at}t}#}},tN},},}#L+Ht, Ht j � Ni#fufNitt}ti}# #}#iN LitLH}N{aLIHaiNNL}IiuFNNNMLHNNNLNNN; ll ' ; ; Oa Oa i i i I vy I I t i i i I I I I i I 114uNY UI.NHu1f{1Mt{Iau3II.MINHitNluu1Y11�YlIHi1lH r IliiNl—-� - �J {H111Iat311NHNIHnLH}MUNIMltHM11NHMH{©1JN ' ' I a__-______..__-___._.______ _-------------- iIF}Htt}i#iN}#f1Nui}LN#N}tHua+#Hi}LHttH1NNLFHILIHHii}tNii}tNNH: V I I 1 I I I t 1 , I � , 1 I i r 1 I 1 I i 1 I 1 I I 1 i NNNF}IH{NttINJN3N}}IHNNH}NHIiiIHIHIHIt31�fICiNNN 1 iNL11a=-��- ' 1 -{ 1 ' I I 1 i f 1 1 I i 1 I I 1 1 � F.HMIIMI}H}NNnMM{{!1 MaNtN{a{}M utiitN HM3Y1 NM{I HH aN.+; I I 1 �p P -t 7 ; I I J I I ' I 1 i f i I 1 1 ! Nit{N3tH.1iiH11{I{Hul....... t}{uNRNUItHtFN�lI31LIIu1{a Ni=-- 1 M r AAqq i 1 Op I j I { i I 1 1 r I I I 1 F t I I I I IfNltNlii}IYaYNt IHJNIHNIi HIi+Hi i#IN NMMYLN}1N IIt t I#Hutt HL i NN; I 1 f i i I I I I I 1 1 1 I r t I 1 I I i t I I I I I 1 I3HNHI#}.IININHn{111.NIN!{NIHMNNluIi NtH©uHl.N.0 i t111}IK--. 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I t I I I I 1 i i I � I I I t i l 1 I t ! I I � {NHMH1fiaNICINYNiiNtii#HHINIMH........N.Yti...... r i I I 1 i I I I I t k 1 I I I 1 1 1 t ` 1 I 0o 1 1 _romy�y i I ~q 9S HHNH.IHNi3.uuiHHN#oH,NtNM1on.IN..... �ofPCCx ! '71D�]]yyy}} 1 I i i P I I t ! r f z I S} I i ! t_______________...__- -.- I PROJECT{ TITLE' MIKE SMITH PROPOSED ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOR: CARPORT FLOOR PLAN a EAST CONTRA COSTA ANLL ELEVATIONS ENGINEERING, INC. IRRIGATION DISTRICT 4 NORTH MAIN STREET PROJECT LOCATION: '4 o H3•c}rLODI, CA1dFQFNIA 95240 I'lll SELLERS AVENUE lkI L BRENTHOOD,CALIFORNIA PHONE (209) 334-2532 '008 fi� s � � �U ¢ — ar iL m Q % b a o D t2'-0' 8 a p� pO F O V-0;'10 PARAPGTLc -� O A m x 0 0 X 0 a I n IQ� o x 0 � X D X a� p I I 8 A x _ o o � I r----- F F- `------- -_ — i DLc LELLF �a 1 o ; ro a f i aK�GIST PROJECT: TITLE: _.. — MIKE SMITH y� PROPOSED ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FDR: MNG.LOSEp PARKING Q EAST CONTRA COSTA," FLOOR PLAN AND ELEVATIONS ENGINEERING, INC. IRRIGATION DISTRICT ' 4 NORTH MAIN STREET I Ny20 PROJECT LOCATION: LODI, CAUFORNU+ 95240 I1I) SELLERS AVEFE.7E NI9��' BRENTWOOD,CALIFORNIA PHONE (209) 394-2932 j C •• p IZ• :;' A , I � r _ sa •dd v i :. i .41 u p � LJ. . z_ [ii I O D i i 9 rnip vta ' 9'-4• _ 1177 un 11HAX y M ' rn MIN. p 0 1 1 1! 11E P117 �p i i . BI$TFRF PROJECT, TITLE- MIKE SMITH PROPOSE12 WILVIN6 FOR: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ENGINEERING INC. EAST CONTRA COSTA? R s I IRRIGATION 'DISTRICT � �L c5T t u� �L� 4 NORTH Maur STREET v PROJECT LOCATION: + LODI, CALIFORNIA 95240 1111 SELLERS AVENUE0i �n� � PHONE (209) 334-2332 3N7`. gRENTWOOD,CALIFORNIA V V'�- t+' z f l CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE # DP07-3050 AS APPROVED BY THE EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 9. 20.08 Administrative 1. This approval is based on the exhibits/reports received by the Community Development Department listed as follows: 1. Preliminary and Final Development Plan dated received by the Community Development Department on February 21, 2008. 2. Stormwater Control Plan dated February 19, 2008. 3. Landscape Plan dated May 24, 2007. I a. The administration building for the East County Irrigation District established by this land use permit shall not be sublet for a different use. 2. This application is subject to an initial application fee of$9,700.00, 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 orprior to use 41the permit whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance plus five working days for file preparation. You may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. If you owe additional fees, a!�bill will be sent to you shortly after permit issuance. Compliance Report 3. At least 30 days,prior to 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$500.00 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. (A copy of the computer file containing the conditions of approval may be available; to try to obtain a copy, contact the project planner at 335-1207.) Zoning Administrator Review 4. At least 30 days prior to the issuance of building permits for the proposed administration building elevations-and paint color. shall be submitted for final review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The design of the building shall incorporate architectural features that enhance the outside appearance of the building (e.g. belly band). Sign Program 5. At least 30 days prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit a sign program for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The program shall set the basic design, color and size parameters for the sign. Li htin 6. Exterior lights shall be. deflected so that lights shine onto applicant's property and not'toward adjacent properties. Sanitation 7. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall provide evidence to the Zoning Administrator that the project complies with the County Environmental Health Department requirements. Landscaping 8. 30 days prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit a final landscape and irrigation plan, for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator, that conforms to the County Water Conservation Ordinance. The plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall be certified to be in compliance with the County Water Conservation Ordinance. The plan shall ensure that the proposed structures are further screened from nearby roadways by adding landscaping to the south side of the proposed covered parking for District Vehicles. Construction Conditions 9. The Applicant shall comply with the following construction noise, dust, litter control and construction traffic requirements: A. Construction Period Development Activity Restrictions — Contractor shall comply with the following requirements: All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and shall be prohibited on state and federal holidays on the calendar dates that these holidays are observed by the state or federal government as listed below: Page 2 Specific On-Site Road Improvements: 11. Any new gates at the driveways shall be setback from the edge of traveled way to provide for queuing of vehicles and shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Fire District and the Public Works Department. Access to Adjoining Property: Proof of Access 12. —.— 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 13. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Application and Permit Center, if necessary, for construction any improvements within the right of way of Sellers Avenue. Site Access 14. Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations shown on the approved site plan. n Sight Distance: 15. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private driveways with Sellers Avenue for a design speed of 60 miles per hour. The applicant shall trim vegetation, as necessary, to provide sight distance at these intersections, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining walls, or other obstructions proposed at these intersections shall be setback to ensure that the sight line is clear of any_obstructions. Pedestrian Facilities: 16. 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. Utilities/Undergrounding: 17. All new utility distribution services shall be installed underground. Page 4 i Maintenance of Facilities: 18. Property Owner shall record a Statement of Obligation in the form of a deed notification, to inform all future property owners of their legal obligation to maintain the on-site private roadway system, any private landscaping, storm drainage facilities, the retention basin and appurtenant facilities, clean water facilities, and any private street lights. The County will not accept these facilities for ownership or maintenance. Drainage Improvements: Collect and Convey 19. Applicant shall collect and convey all stormwater entering and/or originating on this property, wi',thout diversion and within an adequate storm drainage system, to an adequate natural watercourse having 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.' 20. Applicant shall verify that the existing on-site retention basin has adequate storage capacity to contain the 100-year average recurrence interval runoff plus sufficient freeboard. 21. Since the area does not appear to feature a storm drain system or natural watercourse for the conveyance of post-project storm water runoff, the applicant shall be required to convey storm water runoff generated from the site to the East Contra Costa Irrigation District's (ECCID) Canal located along the northern site boundary. It appears that conveyance of excess storm water runoff from the basin to the canal can be accommodated with the installation of a pump (or pumps). Therefore, the applicant shall provide evidence of reasonable back-up measures to assure adequate pumping in case of a break down and/or power failure. In addition, the applicant will be required to submit for the review of the Public Works Department, an Operations and Maintenance Manual for the detention basin, pump, any pump backup systems, and appurtenant facilities. Hold Harmless 22. The property owner shall execute a recordable agreement with the County which states that the applicant, property owner, and the future property owner(s) will hold harmless Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District in the event of damage to the on-site and off-site improvements as a result of failure or erosion of the retention basin, pumps, and any appurtenant facilities. Page 5 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!IDay (State and Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day (State and Federal) Veterans Day (State and Federal) Thanksgiving Day(State and Federal) Day after Thanksgiving (State) Christmas�'Day (State and Federal) For specific details on the actual day the state and federal holidays occur, please 'visit the following websites: Federal Holidays http://www.opm.g_ov/fedhol/2006.asp California Holidays http://viwxN7.edd.ca.gov/eddsthol.htm CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FOR PERMIT DP 07-3050 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9 and Title 10 of the County Ordinance Code. Any exception(s) ;must be stipulated in these Conditions of Approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the_revised site plan submitted to Community Development on February 21, 2008. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. General Requirements: 10. Improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. shall be submitted, if necessary, to the Public Works Department,I 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'development plan permit. Any necessary traffic signing and striping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. Page 3 h 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 Stormwater Control Plan that has been certified and stamped by a licensed Civil Engineer, Architect, or Landscape Architect for the review and approval of the Public Works Department. 28. 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 Discharge Control Ordinance, the "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 "C.3 Guidebook". 29. Any proposed water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer than 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. 30: The applicant shall provide a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan for the review of the Public Works Department, and record an Operation and Maintenance Agreement, including any necessary rights-of- entry, prior to issuance of a building permit. 31. Applicant shall annex into any financing mechanisms (e.g. Community Facilities District) formed to insure that all costs associated with.the perpetual 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 owner(s) that are or will be benefiting from this'development. Page 7 Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 23. The applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the ,Ordinance Code and Public Works Design Standards. 24. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a'concentrated manner. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 25. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) for municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay - Region II, or Central Valley - Region IV). Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMPs) for the reduction or elimination of storm water pollutants. The project design shall incorporate wherever feasible, the following long-term BMPs in accordance with the' Contra Costa Clean Water Program for the site's storm water drainage: - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. Stenciling all storm drains using thermoplastic tape. Construct concrete driveway weakened plane joints at angles to assist in directing run-off`to landscaped/pervious areas prior to entering the street. Shallow roadside and on-site swales. Trash bins shall be sealed to prevent leakage, OR, shall be located within a covered enclosure. Other alternative's comparable to the above as approved by Public Works. Provision "C.3" of the NPDES Permit: 26. 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. As a part of these requirements, the applicant shall incorporate Integrated Management Practices (IMPs) or 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 IMP/BMPs. 27. A revised Stormwater Control Plan `received on February 21, 2008 by the Community Development 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 Page 6 ADVISORY NOTES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION DOES. NOT CONSTITUE 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 J 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 imposition of any dedication, reservation, 'or other exaction required by the 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 the 90 days of the approval date of this permit. B. Comply with the requirements of the County Building Inspection Department. A Building Permit is required. C. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. D. Comply with the requirements of the County Environmental Health Department. E. The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the East County and ECCRFFA/RTDIM Areas of Benefit, as adopted by the 'Board of Supervisors. These fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. F. Although the Stormwater Control Plan has been determined to be preliminarily complete, it remains subject to future revision, as necessary, during preparation of improvement plans in order to bring it into full compliance with C.3 stormwater requirements. Failure to update the SWCP to match any revisions made in the improvement plans may result in a substantial change to the County approval, and the project may be subject to additional public hearings. Revisions to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents may also be required. This may significantly increase the time and applicant's costs associated with approval of the application. GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Board\Board OrdersOP073050.B0.coas.doc Page 8 Exhibit 4 East County Regional Planning Commission Staff Report, June 9, 2008 Agenda Item # Community Development Contra Costa County EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 9, 2008 L INTRODUCTION EAST CONTRA COSTA IRRIGATION DISTRICT (ECCID) (Applicant & Owner): This project consists of the following two related applications: A) County File #RZ07-3192: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 4.82 acre parcel from Exclusive Agricultural District (A-40) to Planned Unit District (P-1) with a variance to minimum area for nonresidential use ( 4.9 acres, where 10 acres required), and; B) County File #DP07-3050: The applicant request approval of a Preliminary and Final Development Plan to construct a 3,296 square foot administration building and associated parking facilities. The subject site is located at 171,1 Sellers Avenue in the Brentwood area. (A-40) (ZA: N- 25) (CT: 3031.00) (APN: 010-190-007). II. RECOMMENDATION A. Find that the Negative Declaration was presented to the East County Planning . Commission, and the Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration prior to making a decision on the project; and B. Find the Negative Declaration reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis and was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State' and County CEQA Guidelines and designated the Community Development Division as the custodian of the documents which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decision is based; and C. Find that on the basis of the whole record before it, the County has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.; and D. Adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed Rezoning (County File # RZ07-3192) from Exclusive Agricultural (A-40) to Planned Unit District (P-1) with a variance to minimum area for nonresidential use (4.9 acres, where 10 acres required) and the related Preliminary and Final Development Plan (County File #DP07-3050). {f I11. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The project site is designated Agricultural Core (AC) in the General Plan. B. Zoning: The project site is zoned Exclusive Agricultural District (A-40). C. CEQA Status: A Negative Declaration was posted on May 5, 2008 for a twenty day public comment period that ended on May 26, 2008. There have- been no comments received by the Community'Development Division as of the writing of this staff report. D. Legal Lot: The subject parcel, APN 010-190-007, is a legal lot that was created by minor subdivision, County File# MS 67-84. IV. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION The subject site is approximately 4.82 acres and is located on the west side of Sellers Avenue in the unincorporated Brentwood area. The City of Brentwood boundary lies just to the north of the subject parcel. The surrounding land uses to the south and east are characterized by larger, agricultural lots with an East Contra Costa Irrigation District (ECCID) Main Canal on the north and Church Road on the south. The adjacent property to the west is used for a church and the property to the south'is used for agriculture. Located approximately 500-feet to the northeast on Sellers Avenue is the PG & E Brentwood Substation (see exhibit#1 attached). On the site currently is the;,District's 9,500 square-foot Operation and Maintenance building with related parking, utilities and a storm drain retention basin. The Operation and Maintenance building is two stories ,and constructed of metal. The ground floor is an 8,000 square-feet shop area that is used by the District staff for fabrication and repairs related to the distribution of water to the local farming community. There are approximately 1,500 square-feet of office-type uses for the District field staff and agricultural customers on the second level. V. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed scope of the project includes the following: A. Rezoning: The applicant is requesting approval of a.rezoning application that would change the zoning of the site from Exclusive Agricultural District, (A- 40) to Planned Unit District, (P-1) with a variance to minimum area for nonresidential use (4.9 acres, where 10 acres required) (See Exhibit 3 attached). B. Development Plan Approval: Concurrently the applicant. is requesting approval of a Preliminary and Final Development Plan final to construct a SR- 2 3,292 square feet, one story administration building, two carports, one 2,160 square feet and the 'other 720 square feet, with a 3,750 square feet enclosed garage for District vehicles. There is an existing two story 9,500 square foot building that houses the operation and maintenance functions of the District that are necessary to deliver water to their customers ( See attached Preliminary and Final Development Plan). VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Contra Costa County Fire Protection District: Memo dated August 9, 2007 the District submitted comments on the application (attached). Contra Costa County Health Services Department, Environmental Health: Memo dated August 15, 2007 requires the project to comply with Environmental Health Department on site waste water disposal requirements. VII. CEQA REVIEW A Negative Declaration was posted on May 5, 2008 for a 20 day comment period. No comments were received by the Community Development Division during that period. VIII. Background and purpose off existing structures on the property The ECCID is the water supply provider for the 12,000-acre agricultural area surrounding Brentwood and Knightsen. The District's facilities divert water from the Delta near Discovery Bay in Indian Slough and distribute it through pump stations, canals and pipelines to the farmers who apply the water to their fields for the production of food and fiber. In 2004 the ECCID embarked on a project.to relocate a portion of its existing Operation and .Maintenance Center from its location on the District's Main Canal property approximately 2,000 feet east of Sellers Avenue to a wider portion of the canal property west of Sellers Avenue, where it now is located. Under government code section 53091 (e), which exempts public utilities from local zoning ordinances for construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water, the ,District obtained a building permit from the County and constructed what is now on the site, a 9,500 square foot Operation and Maintenance building. The project site; was an approximately five-acre fallow field that was plowed several times a year for weed control and fire prevention. The sole purpose of the project was to provide,,a more efficient and safer work environment for District staff, which provides services to the agricultural community, and for the agricultural community that is served by the District. As a result of that project the District was able to abandon existing substandard structures, an existing substandard wastewater disposal system and an existing substandard domestic well system. SR- 3 The existing Maintenance and Operation Center continued to support and contribute to the production of water supplies for use in the District. Specifically, the buildings and yard serve as a home base for District field personnel and agricultural customers ordering water, as a maintenance center for equipment used to produce and deliver agricultural water, and as the center for the District's computerized canal control system. IX. STAFF ANALYSIS /DISCUSSION Back.around of current application In early 2007 the District approached the County because they wanted to add an administration building to the site so that they could consolidate their administrative and customer support functions, which currently are housed in a small office in Brentwood, on one site. Since this proposal was beyond the scope of Government Code Section 53091 (e) that established the Operation and Maintenance building on the site the District was directed by the County to apply for a rezoning from A-40 to P-1 and a preliminary and„final development plan for and administration building with related parking. Project Consistency with the General Plan: The applicant proposes to rezone the project site from Exclusive Agricultural, A-40, to Planned Unit District, 'P-1, with the . approval of a preliminary and final development plan for an administration building and related facilities. While it may appear that an additional building, placed on an existing, developed site. would be appropriate, there are issues that require resolution, mainly, the original project, combined with the new proposal, could be considered precedent setting in allowing intrusion into a protected agricultural area. This project is located within an area designated in the General Plan as Agricultural Core (AC). The types of uses allowed in the AC are very limited. It is a category established to protect one of the few remaining prime agricultural zones in the county. As such, the area is intended for use that is directed exclusively toward the production of food, fiber, and plant materials. The dispensation of this particular project, as with the previous project developed on this site in 2004, depends upon the County's interpretation of the purpose and use of these structures in relation to agricultural production. The text of the General Plan gives the County two choices relative to this project. The County can either define the use as being akin to a conditional, ancillary use like commercial, agricultural, support services that are not allowed; or the County can make the finding that this facility falls within the language of the text which states, "The uses that are allowed in the Agricultural Lands designation include all land-dependent and non-land dependent agricultural production and'related activities". This finding would-be supported by the portion of the Agricultural Core text which states, "The uses that are allowed in the Agricultural Core Designation are the same as those allowed, without the issuance SR - 4 of a land use permit, in the Agricultural Lands designation . . . " The distinction between a "conditional use" that is not allowed under AC and a "related" agricultural activity that would be allowed is subtle, and not all that clear within the text of the General Plan, as previously indicated. Making this distinction is critical as to whether we can issue a finding of compliance for this project. Furthermore to make a.definitive finding for the Administration Building the County has to make an interpretation of the intent of the General Plan where the text is not explicit, or is unclear. The County's interpretation of the intent of the General Plan as to allowable uses within the AC areas is that only very exceptional, non-commercial, and necessary support services, with limited negative associated impacts to the limited number of prime agricultural acres within the Agricultural Core, are allowable within the intent of the General Plan. This is an interpretation that reflects the strong intent to protect a diminishing resource to the greatest extent. It is an interpretation that preserves the intent to disallow the conditional uses specified in the General Plan for Agricultural Land, while also preserving the intent to find conformance for highly select uses that serve agricultural production and pose minor disruptions or have marginal impacts to the productive capacity of available AC lands. As to the clarification regarding use of this site, we are defining this as a non-land dependent agricultural production related activity. As to the clarification regarding the intent of the General Plan for the Agricultural Core the County has made the following interpretation: since this project is for a public agency, involves limited acreage, supports agricultural production, even though not directly an element of production, is a unique and extraordinary use.as an agricultural irrigation support facility, and has limited impact in terms of transit effects, or encouraging non-agricultural growth in the area, the County's finding is that this project is in compliance with the intent of the General Plan, in relation to the text and intentions, regarding areas that have been designated Agricultural Core (AC). If this project involved a greater expansion of the use of prime agricultural land, or had other significant impacts to the Agricultural Core, the County's finding would have been for non-compliance. This is to say, that any future proposals that would go beyond the current "envelope" that encloses the current project site would be subject to the greatest scrutiny and there would be a high probability of a finding of non- compliance with the General Plan. Project Consistency with the Zoning District The site is zoned Exclusive Agricultural, A-40. The only other zoning district that is consistent with the Agricultural Core General Plan designation and that might allow the proposed uses is the Planned Unit District (P-1). To bring the zoning of the site into compliance with the General Plan the applicant is concurrently requesting approval of a rezoning to Planned Unit District (P-1). SR- 5 Parking and Landscaping The proposed development ;plan for the project complies with the County Parking Ordinance by providing 32 ;off-street parking spaces with an additional 18 covered parking spaces for District Vehicles. The proposed landscaping for the project screens the structures but staff has required by condition of approval # 9 that landscaping be added to the south side of the proposed covered parking for District vehicles so that it is sufficiently screened. X. PUBLIC WORKS CONSIDERATIONS Traffic and Circulation The subject site fronts Sellers Avenue, a public road, along the easterly boundary, and Church Lane, a private road along the southerly boundary. There is an existing 20 foot wide offer of dedication for roadway purposes along the project, frontage of Sellers Avenue, which is adequate for the ultimate .planned right of way width of 100 feet. Therefore, the applicant will :not be required to dedicate any additional right of way along the project frontage of Sellers Avenue. There is an existing deferred improvement agreement recorded on,the subject site for frontage improvements and necessary pavement wideningj'and appurtenant facilities (12398 OR 264); therefore, the applicant will not be required to construct frontage improvements along Sellers Avenue at this time. Drainage Storm water runoff from the site is directed to an existing basin located along the southern boundary of the site. The applicant has indicated in the site plan that post- project runoff shall also be directed to the existing basin. The applicant shall therefore verify that the existing on-site retention basin has adequate storage capacity to contain the 100-year average recurrence interval runoff plus sufficient.freeboard. Since the applicant has not provided a plan to ultimately discharge storm water collected in the basin, the applicant will be required to discharge excess storm water into the East Contra Costa Irrigation District Canal via a proposed pump. XI. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the East County Regional Planning Commission find that the Negative Declaration is adequate for the project and adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the rezoning (County File 4 RZ07-3192) with a variance to the minimum area and the related Preliminary and Final Development Plan (County File 4 DP07-3050). GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Staff Reports\DP073050.stfrptJvo.doc SR - 6 Intentionally Blank Exhibit 5 Pertinent Correspondence Response from County to applicant regarding General Plan Compliance for a Proposed Administration Building, dated February 13, 2007 91 ' cul 03 2007 7: 25AM 12098339167 P. 1 DennICP Community Contra [)anis Ni,Barry. pme `i Community development D"u+ector Development Costa Department County County Administration Building 651 Pine Street Fourth Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553-1229 Phone: (925)335-1242 '� t February 13,2007 Mr. Larry G. Preston General Manager East Contra Costa Irrigation District 626 First St. Brentwood,Ca 94513 Dear Mr.Preston: Re: Response to Request for Administrative Review for General Plan Compliance,''ifor a.Proposed Administration Facility Btiiding.by the East Contra Costa County Irrigation District Sellers Avenue,Brentwood area APN is 010-190-007 County Fide#2106-11579 This letter is in response to the Request for Determination regarding the Administration Building proposed for the East Contra Costa Irrigation District (ECCID) on Sellers Avenue. To briefly summarize your project;in addition to the existing Operation and Maintenance District _Building, you are now proposing five new structures with the following approximate floor area/coverages: Administration Building 2900 sq.ft. Covered Parking for District Vehicles 3240 sq. ft. Covered Parking 2160 sq. ft. Covered Employee Parking 720 sq. ft. Prefabricated Building 175 sq. ft.- Project Consistency with the General Plan Our review of the District's proposal addresses whether it fits the intent of the General Plan and abides by the zoning regulations that govern this area. While it may appear that an additional building,placed on an existing, developed site,arould be simple to approve, .iul 03 2007 7: 25AM 12098339187 p. 2 there are actually many questions that still apply that require resolution. The original project, combined with the new (,proposal, could be considered precedent setting in allowing incursions into a protected agricultural area The Department needs to be very . careful that this does not occur and that non-agricultural development, of any kind,in this area,is minimized. A summary of staff thoughts and findings are highlighted below: • This project is located within an area designated in the General Plan as Agricultural Core(AC). The types of uses allowed in the AC are very limited. It is a category established to protect one of the few remaining prime agricultural zones in the county. As such, the area is intended for use that is directed exclusively toward the production of food, fiber,and plant materials. Conditional, ancillary uses that are allowed in the General Plan under the Agricultural Land (AL) designation, with land use permits, such as commercial enterprises that serve agricultural interests,!,;are not allowed in the more restrictive Agricultural Core (except for wineries and olive oil mills). + The dispensation of this particular project, as with the previous project developed on this site in 2004, depends upon the interpretation of the purpose and use of these structures im relatian to agricultural production. The text of the General Plan gives us two choices relative to this,project_ We can either define the use as being aldn to a conditional, ancillary use like commercial, agricultural, support services that are not allowed; or we{dan make the finding that this facility falls within the language of the text which states, "The uses that are allowed in the Agricultural Lands designation include all land-dependent and non-land dependent agricultural production and related activities". This fording would be supported by the portion of the Agricultural Core text which states, "The uses that are allowed in the Agricultural Core Designation are the same as those allowed, without the issuance of a land use permit, in the'Agricultural Lands designation . . . ".The distinction between a "conditional use" that is not allowed under AC and a "related" agricultural activity that would be allowed is subtle, and not all that clear within the text of the General Plan, as previously indicated. Maldng this distinction is critical as to whether we can issue a finding of compliance for this project. + Furthen ore to make a definitive finding, for the Administration Building, we have to make an interpretation of.the intent of the General Plan where the text is not explicit,or is unclear. Our interpretation of the intent of the General Plan as to allowable uses within the AC is that only very exceptional,non-commercial, and necessary support services, with limited negative associated impacts to the limited number of prime agricultural acres within the Agricultural Core, are allowable within the intent of the General Plan. This is an interpretation that reflects the strong intent to protect a 'dtininishing resource to the greatest extent—the acreage of land that qualifies under the.rating of Class I or II in the USDA Nattn-al Resources Conservation Service land use capability classification. It is an interpretation that preservesywthe intent to disallow the conditional uses specified in the General Plan for AL lands, while. also preserving the intent to find conformance for highly select uses that serve agricultural production and pose 2 Jul 03 2007 7: 258M 12098839167 p. 3 minor disruptions or have marginal impacts to the productive capacity of available AC lands. • As to the clarification regarding use of this site,we are defining this as a non-land dependent agricultural production related activity. • As to the clarification regarding the intent of the General PIan for the Agricultural Care we have made the following interpretation: Since this project is for a public . agency, involves limited acreage, supports agricultural production, even though not directly an element of production, it is a unique and extraordinary use as an agricultural irrigation support facility, and it has limited impact in terms of effects, or encouraging non"-agricuhural growth in the area, our finding is that this project is in compliance wi'ih the intent of the General Plan, in relation to the text and intentions,regarding meas that have been designated Agricultural Core(AC). If this project involved.a g;eater expansion of the use of prime agricultural land, or had other significant impacts to.the Agricultural Core, our fznding would have been for non-,compliance. This is to say, that any future proposals that would go beyond the current "envelope" that encloses the current project site would. be. subject to the greatest scrutiny and there would be a high-probability of a fording of non-compliance with the;General Plan. Accordingly, if the District has any notion of proposing additional development, it should be brought to the attention of staff before you seek further review of your project from.County staff so that we might assess the"whole project" for consistency.. with the General Plan. Muirernent to Apply for and Obtain Planned Unit District Rezoninainal Development Plan The Current Plamning staff of our department has also reviewed your proposal for compliance with zoning regulations. The site is zoned.Exclusive Agricultural, A-40. Your submittal suggested that the proposed uses may be allowable under the existing, A-40 zoning district. You have cited a reference in that district to the A-20 district that provides that merchandising of agricultural services is a use that is allowed after the granting of a land use permit However, staff does not view the activities that you are proposing as constituting"merchandising." The only other zoning district that is consistent with the Agricultural'Core designation and that rnigbt allow the proposed uses is the Planned Unit (P-1)District. Enclosed is a copy of that district To be fable to apply:the provisions of that district to ECCID property will require the following:. • Approval of a rezoning from the A40 district to the P-1 district,and • Approval of a Preliminary and Final Development Plan. 3 Jul 03 2007 7: 25AM p 12098''39197 p. 4 Enclosed are applications for both sets of entitlements. Please note that both applications would be initially heard by the East County Regional Planning Commission, whose recommendation would then be conveyed and heard and decided by the Board of Supervisors. No development is allowed unless,it is consistent with the approved Final Developmeatt Plan. Application Filing_Fees — The processing of applications is subject to fees covering staff time and material costs. a There is an initial deposit for both the rezoning and development plan applications:, $6,200 and$3000;respectively. However, there are also other smaller fees that are collected at the application submittal stage (posting fee, public notice mailing fl etc.). The fees are payable to the County of Contra Costa,but we suggest that you not complete a check until you submit the applications and a planner is able to review Them. Compliance with the Review Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act The rezoning and development plan applications constitute discretionary decisions. The decision by the District to authorize this project is also a discretionary decision. The California Environmental i! uality Act(CEQA)provides that local agencies must first.comply with the review requirements of the CEQA prior to approving a discretionary project. Both the District and the County have a hole in determining-the appropriate CEQA review for this project. However, because the District will be carrying out the project,the State CEQA Guidelines provides that the District shall be the Lead Agency for purposes of compliance with CEQA (§ 15051 (a)). The County's role would be as a CEQA Responsible.Agency. Before the District reaches any conclusions about a proposed CEQA determination for the project, we would suggest that the District first consult with the project planner that is assigned to the rezoning and development plan applications. Moreover, this consultation should occur approximately 2 months after the rezoning and development plan applications have been filed with the County and have been deemed complete by the projectplanner. Sum eg_sted Withdrawal of 8/3/2006 Variance Permit Application (File #VR06-1061) for Covered Parking Along the'PNorth Property Line Last surnmer,*ECCID filed a separate application for a variance to allow the proposed covered carport along the northern property line. Staff views this structure as integral to the Administration Building complex, and it should be processed as.part of the Planned Unit Distract (P-1) Rezoning/Final Development Plan, and not separately from that building. Accordingly, we would request that you withdraw that application, and instead focus on including that structure in the applications for the rezoning.proposal for the Administration Building. This might be accomplished by sending a letter that identifies the file number to the project planner,Debbie Laughlin.. 4 Jul 03 2007 7: 26AM 12098?99167 p. 5 Should you have any questions concerning the General Plan analysis, please contact me at 335-1242.. Should you have any questions concerning zoning compliance analysis or the Planned Unit District Rezoning/Development Plan procedure,.please contact Bob Drake of the Current Planning Division of this department at 335-1214. Sincerely, Patrick Roche Principal Planner Contra Costa County Community Development Department Enc. Applications for: P-1 Rezoning, Preliminary/Final Development Plan Adopted Fee Schedule cc: Dennis Barry, Community Development Director Catherine Kutsuris Robert Drake James Cisney Debbie Laughlin G:Wdvance PlanningWisney\CorrespondeaceWdminiscuive Reviem\ECCCID Req.for Det-b..doc 5 Exhibit 6 CEQA Determination / Negative Declaration z . ICP Community Contra Dennis it Devearry,lopment pme Contra tt CC.�i Community Development Director .Development Costa Department County County Administration Building H L F 6�,•,L 651 Pine Street Fourth Floor, North Wing % MAY 05 2006 Martinez, California 94553-1229 S.L.WEIR, COUNTYC RK Phone. cUsra'roue `�~ CONTRA STA co (925)335-1210 BY PUTY NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPO D NEGATIVE DECLARATION County File 9 RZ07-3192 &DP07-3050 Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended to date,this is to advise you that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: East Contra Costa Irrigation District(ECCID)requests approval of the following two related applications; rezoning of a 4.8 acre site from A-40,Exclusive Agricultural to P-1,Planned Unit District (County File 4 RZ07-3192) and a preliminary and final development plan to construct a 3, 292 square foot administration building with associated parking. The property is addressed at 11.17 Sellers Avenue in the Brentwood area. (A-40) (Parcel# 010-190-007) The proposed rezoning and development will not result in any significant impacts. A copy of the Negative Declaration and all documents referenced therein may be reviewed in the offices of the Community Development Department, and.'Application and Permit Center at the McBrien Administration Building, North Wing, Fourth Floor, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, during,normal business hours. Public Comment Period - The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of Ahe environmental documents extends to 5:00 P.M., Mail 26, 2008. Any comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address: Community Development Department Administration Building Attn: John Obome 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, CA 94553 It is anticipated that the proposed Negative Declaration will be considered for adoption at ameeting of the East County Regional Planning Commission hearing on June 9, 2008. The hearing is anticipated to be held at the Antioch City Council Chambers, 3rd & H Street, Antioch, California. It is expected that the East County Regional Planning Commission will also conduct a hearing on the application at that same meeting. John Oborne Senior Planner cc: County Clerk's Office(2 copies) Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Proposed Administration Building & Ancillary Parking for the East Contra Costa Irrigation District (ECCID). County File #'s RZ07-3192 &DP07-3050 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,North Wing, 4`h Floor Martinez, CA 94553 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: John Oborne, Project Planner, 925-335-1207 4. Project Location: East Contra Costa Irrigation District 1711 Sellers Avenue Brentwood, CA 94513 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: East Contra Costa Irrigation District 626 First Street Brentwood, CA 94513 6. General Plan Designation: Agricultural Core, (AC) 7. Zoning: Exclusive Agricultural District, (A-40) 8. Description of Project: The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning of a 4.8-acre project site from Exclusive Agricultural, A-40 to Planned Unit District, P-1, and a Development Plan to construct a 3,296 square foot, one story administration building, two carports, one 2,160 square foot and the other 720 square foot, with a 3,750 square feet enclosed garage for District vehicles. Currently on the site is an existing two story 9500 square foot building that houses the operation and maintenance functions of the District that are necessary to deliver water to their customers. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The subject site is located on the west side of Sellers Avenue in the unincorporated Brentwood area. The City of Brentwood boundary lies just to the north of the subject parcel. The surrounding land uses are characterized by larger agricultural lots with an ECCID Main Canal on the north and Church Road on the south. The adjacent property to the west is used for religious gathering and the property to the south is used for agriculture. Located approximately 500-feet to the northeast on • t• Sellers Avenue is the Brentwood PG&E Substation ( see exhibit I following page for vicinity map). A small portion of the southern 4.8 acres parcel, approximately .81 acres, is'used for an existing' retention basin. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required(e.g. permits, financing, approval, or participation agreement): The Contra Costa Public Works Department, Contra Costa Fire District, Contra Costa Environmental Health, Contra Costa Building Inspection Department TZ { }1T(}��y�;J w.FS �� oilf� kia�-- --y��;�{ g� g o y �r _•�r �r�+ to ams j , �`r` ��`�' �-��,il y,1 ' L��,`":� + ' � : > �nie � •, 1�i1 :moi 1� k !i� '� ♦� 0 • a ,. , R �� I ! t.: .� = fi• ! ire _ VVI 74 t - , � � el••I�•q_�,r # if t t s• f .i Jfi!ilil ' ' ' <s .t ,t^fir • t� ' _ °'��' ...^''�... 75}(��' M _ f ! a! 1! iki e �'. �.s". i $.,. ♦att t.t rl !A =�� O >•ib !w .:Sellers Ave 71 + t.-J'•:•«n'. i [ . bi .ice' x � ® ® gEI �O } i � R ter. �,+ � � `; , ® "- • - - illi �w.�p. ! r ' Its •:: ..,! ,>� + y� ffrf'I ';t � y}�F� ,4r��,_ �� + ��r F t r '-'•'ry,[�" i �J �f+ ,,inky", a 't� t.�.t�,�. � }�,1:--:=o-.t.• f".� � ,�. 4 i+ ! .f All ti�y�'i +�1+ �.✓,L� •• ' tV.dP '0..X'.. t x a s • y !i) , f rM1 'b t. Y 71 r ...w '�t� ,`}�`rt�c. h k+ }�i +.n.tC Y + �53� • 'G,�L�.`_ '7j _' •}.`} ..��+.tN. 'i' �+a�'»k ✓`"�' (AVIA� `" "' � tL�.'}t � = KI ! , +I ��t�y�}-rt r •£ t. f�=�"J_9 Y �.� � taa"`.n.;�._ ...:�'i;"�.�.:i1r:.. } .��,'-� .•t" } it � Y •s t��t L I Y . ;�,� ar ! ! gr;_t ttt t;'S till t1..H.�Y}..l 1°°#" a iAi>,,n.�� „i' � "•i e�' hNx, t 3ytS.: ..j, �t� ,yo f.•M i 'x� !).. 'Ate* i � t'T(,i• x-, i v g d'~ I.IYi:! Lie Te Wk kt �+ k<k{4 Cats rir) S'' may---_ �mmT�zn 3 .'L. ',a•�.`.��7.t�•1P.J ,�y� r I fir=jj. J ; 'O Is�i'gq1ty.�. �•�Sia q .. V7 O i IlaLn �:•; f��mI. :D O I aax V' f'r }�,�Z it 1 �a o(•— I.68j� carr I 1~ D s Wz. �{ �I•�o� 7 K' ='/ �I .G rk' —"a• -, .L•a'r.93 cDi<•- I Nag �is ,ti, �• y aS.Y P19 1 I .I 3b ./ fig•' n � M0,, / t �\ r "'"^/;Tvy3''i^r'�Ea'""-ati :.l^'tR+ +:r^F:� -..r'•-'Z-••-"^`SwN'YY,i0.»'_ P ` SELLERS AVENUE 7a r + rf o e : a a a ECCID ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BP 01-3050 ^^'" •40"0""•° """• + °E G® °P Ep1�nQ e�„� °” PRELIM.&FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN '"'""°"'L m R.ro PROPOSED S[TE PLAN M,ILANI IRERIt000 Cour COSTA cOum CAUFORIM •,+ar e..r•nr,r a.4•a...r r..r w amu/„ .:�cr.�mvwr�aw.wnv�eiroua-a .-o.-w icrrco w ...� ru —X-1S8. 4 rn €_ { ' > ® ® : i rn T;' a Q �7 1 ne Ills 3 3 (� Ex\ FPO.ECT, TITLE. D om, F-05ED AJMIN15TRATIp BUILDING FOR EXTERIOR EL_NATON5-OPPice "MAIN H _AST CONTRA COSTA INC. s i IRRIGATION DISTRICT EETPRO.ELL R5 ATIAVeDNi 52105E11R5 nvE!uE PRELIMINARY AND PINALBRENTP OD.CALIFORNIA DEVELOPI-MNT PLAN = ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning _ Transportation/ _ Public Services Population &Housing Circulation _ Utilities & Service Geological Problems _ Biological Resources Systems _ Water _ Energy & Mineral _ Aesthetics Air Quality Resources _ Cultural Resources Mandatory Findings of _ Hazards Recreation Significance _ Noise 4 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will-be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an' attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project, MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if'the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed;,project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in-an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to'that earlier'EK including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature Date John Oborne, Project Planner Contra Costa County Community Development Department 5 SOURCES In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation, the following references (which are available for review at the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street 4th Floor-North Wing,Martinez)were consulted: 1. Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020). 2: Contra Costa County Municipal Code. 3. General Plan and Zoning Maps. 4. Contra Costa County Important Farmland Map 2006. 5. Cortese Hazardous Materials List. 6. Flood Insurance Rate Zone Info r" ation Map, 1987 Base Maps. 7. Project description and site plan. 8. Site Visit on January 17, 2008. 9. The East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/NCCP 10. Letter from East Contra Costa Irrigation District(ECCID), dated May 23, 2007. 11. Memo from ECCID, dated October 22, 2007, regarding groundwater and fire inspection information. 12. Letter from the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, dated February 13, 2007 to ECCID regarding Administrative Review for General Plan Compliance for Proposed Administration Building. 13. Stormwat:er Control Plan, dated February 19, 2008. 14. Memo from Contra Costa County Public Works Department, dated April 22,2008. 6 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No lm�act Incorporated Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Sources: 3, 8) X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic'highway? (Sources: 3, 8 X c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?(Sources: 8) X d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?(Sources: 7) X Summary: The subject site is not located on a scenic vista or state scenic highway. However, the site is within approximately '/< of a mile west and north of State Highway 4, which is a state scenic highway. But, because the proposed structures are not substantial in size (12 to 20 feet in height) and there are existing structures of similar size and'a little larger to the proposed project in the immediate area, this project would not have a substantial impact on the scenic resources of the scenic highway, nor would it substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or surrounding area. Exterior lights shall be conditioned to be deflected so that-lights shine onto applicant's property and not toward adjacent properties and also as a condition the project is required to submit final landscape plans that helps screen the project site. I1. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES a. Convert Prime Farmland, ,Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (Sources:4) X b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract?(Sources: 2,3,12) X c. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Sources: 7) X Summary: a. The subject parcel is designated Farmland of Local Importance on the Contra Costa County Important Farmland Map 2006,which is land that is typically used for livestock grazing.However,the proposed project does not convert farmland since the existing use of the land is for the District operation and maintenance building,ancillary structures and a storm drain retention basin. 7 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Fact b. The site is zoned Exclusive Agricultural District, A40. The purpose of this zoning designation is to provide and protect areas for agricultural uses by preventing the establishment of urban and any other incompatible uses. The project proposes to construct an administration building and parking facilities for East Contra Costa County Irrigation District,who produce and provide irrigation water for the agricultural community in the Brentwood and Knightsen area. In regard to consistency with the zoning ordinance,as previously noted,the site is zoned Exclusive Agricultural,A40 and the only other zoning district that is consistent with the Agricultural Core designation for this site and may allow the uses that are proposed is Planned Unit District,P-1.To bring the project site into compliance with the General Plan the applicant has submitted an application to rezone the project site from A-40 to P-1. For further discussion of compliance with agricultural use please see Section IX, Land Use and Planning(b). The property is not under a Williamson Act Contract. c. There is an existing two story 9500 square foot building that houses the operation and maintenance functions of the District that are necessary to deliver water to their customers and an on-site detention basin and various small accessory buildings, so there would be no conversion of farmland as a result of the project. III. AI.R QUALITY a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Sources: 1) X b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?(Sources: 7) X c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?(Sources: 7) X d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?(Sources: 7) X e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?(Sources: 7) X Summary: During construction there will be short-term air pollution caused by construction activities. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District does not require quantification of construction emissions,but considers any project's construction related impacts to be less than significant if required dust control measures are implemented.The applicant will be required to comply with building department requirements, which include dust control measures during construction. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status 8 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?(Sources: 13 ) X b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?(Sources:3,7) X c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Sources: 1 7 8) x d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or,wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Sources:) x e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance?(Sources: 7,8) X f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation. Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan?(Sources: 7) X r. Summary: a,b,c,d,e: The subject site is not located in an area designated "Significant Ecological Areas and Selected Locations of Protected Wildlife and Plant Species" in the General Plan., and there are no trees proposed for removal. The site has been previously disturbed and there is an existing building on the site'and a detention basin. f The project site is located in an area that is not subject to the East Contra Costa Habitat Conservation Plan for compliance and it is not a conservation priority. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 Sow-ces: 7} X b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? 9 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Sources:7) X c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? (Sources:7)' X d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?(Sources:7) X Summary: a.b.c.d. The project site is developed and the probability of finding cultural resources or human remains is minimal. However, as a condition of approval for the project, if during grading resources are uncovered, earthwork within 50 feet of these materials shall be stopped until a certified professional has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation(s) if deemed necessary. V1. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the' risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1.' Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. (Sources:]) . X 2. Strong seismic ground shaking?(Source:l) X 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (Sources:1,3) X 4. Landslides?(Sources:1, 75 X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (Sources: 1,3 ) X d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1998), creating substantial risks to life or property?(Sources: 1,3) X e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?(Sources: 1,7) X Summary: The proposed project is not located in an Alquiest-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, but the site is located in an area where the soil is designated Quanternary Alluvium, which may include expansive soils. However,the project is subject to the Uniform Building Code, which would reduce the potential impact to a less than significant degree. There is a leach field currently on the site that services the existing building and any expansion thereof is subject to the requirements of the Environmental Health Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incolporated Impact Fact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,' use or disposal of hazardous materials?(Sources:7,10,11) X b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?(Sources:7,10,11) X c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle,hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Sources: 1,8) X d. Be located on a site which is included 'on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Sources: 5) X e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. (Sources: ) X f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?(Sources:] ) X g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?(Sources: 7) X h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Sources: 1,7,8) X Summary: The,project site contains a small building for storage of herbicides and pesticides, that are delivered to the site four times a year and are used for weed abatement on the applicant's site. The site also contains a fueling station for gas and diesel fuels. But, since the site is located in a sparsely populated area and the fueling station is regulated by the Fire District the storage of such items does not present a hazard to the public. Additionally, the site is not located on a hazardous waste site or within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport. 11 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Fact The project site is located along Sellers Avenue in the Brentwood area and would not impair or physically interfere with an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The project does not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss involving wildfires because it is in an area that is surrounded by agricultural uses and the weeds are periodically removed from the project site. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER OUALITY—Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?(Sources: 1, 13 ) X b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table(e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (Sources: 7) X c. Substantially alter the existing drainage,pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (Sources: 7) X d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface run-off in a manner that would result in flooding on-or off-site? X (Sources:7,13,14) e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned-storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Sources: 7,1,3,14) X f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Sources: 7,1.3 ) X g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?(Sources: 6) X h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? (Sources: X 7) i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?(Sources: 7) X j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (Sources: X 7) 12 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incomorated Impact Impact a. The project is required to be in full compliance with the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Ordinance, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook (third edition), and the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. A revised stormwater control plan (SWCP), dated February 21, 2008 was reviewed by the Public Works Department and determined to be preliminarily complete with the provision that prior to issuance of building permits for the project the applicant shall submit a Final stormwater control plan for review and approval be the Public Works Department. Measures included in the SWCP include converting portions of the existing swale to vegetated.swale, limiting imperviousness, all impervious areas that are created drain to vegetated swale. b. The site is currently served by an on-site well that provides water for up to 13 employees that use the site through out the day. The project proposes to add an additional 3 employees and some landscaping which is not a substantial increase on the demand for well water. c. The site is substantially flat and would not be subject to erosion. d. The project proposes to add an administration building, an enclosed carport, a covered carport and a small area of concrete to the site which already contains operations and maintenance building and some small accessory structures. When completed the project will treat runoff from an area consisting of 54,492 square feet of impervious area, and 57,088 square feet of pervious area. Stormwater runoff from the site is directed to an existing basin located along the southern boundary of the site. The applicant has indicated in the site plan the post-project runoff shall also be directed to the existing basin. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the project the applicant shall therefore verify that the existing on-site retention basin has adequate storage capacity to contain the 100-year average recurrence interval runoff plus sufficient freeboard. Since the applicant has not provided a plan to ultimately discharge stormwater collected in the basin, the applicant will be required to discharge excess stormwater into the East Contra Costa Irrigation District Canal, which is just north of the site, via a proposed pump. e. See d above, f, See a above, g,h,I,j No impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: a: Physically divide an established community?'. (Sources:7) X b. Conflict with-any applicable land use plan, policy,'of the regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, . local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted'for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Sources: 1,2,3, X 12) c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?(Source: 9) X a. The project is located at 1711 Sellers Avenue.in the Brentwood area and does not divide an established community. b. This project is located within an area designated in the General Plan as Agricultural Core (AC). The types of uses allowed in the AC are very limited. It is a category established to protect one of the few remaining prime agricultural zone in the county. As such, the area is intended for use that is directed 13 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact exclusively toward the production of food, fiber and plant materials. Conditional, ancillary uses that are allowed in the General Plan under the Agricultural Land (AL) designation, with land use permits, such as commercial enterprises that serve agricultural interests, are not allowed in the more restrictive Agricultural.Core(except for wineries and olive oil mills). The dispensation of this particular project, as with the previous project developed on this site in 2004, depends upon the interpretation of the propose and use of these structures in relation to agricultural production. The County has made the finding that the project is consistent with the intent of the General Plan for the Agricultural Core for the following reasons: Since this project is for a public agency, involves limited acreage, supports agricultural production, even though not directly an.element of production, it is a unique and extraordinary use as an agricultural irrigation support facility, and it has limited impact in terms of effects,or encouraging non-agricultural growth in the area. If this project involved a greater expansion of the use of prime''agricultural land, or had other significant impacts to the Agricultural Core, our finding would have been for non-compliance. This is to say, that any future proposals.that would go beyond the current "envelope" that encloses the current project site would be subject to the greatest scrutiny and there would be a high probability of a finding of non-compliance with the General Plan. c. As previously noted the project site is located in an area that is not subject to the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan. X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the .residents of the state?(Sources: 1) _ X b. Result in the loss or availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? '(Sources: 1 ) X Summary: The subject site is not located in an area designated Mineral Resource Area in the General Plan. X1. NOISE-Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or 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, 7) X b. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive ground bome vibration or ground borne noise levels? X c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Sources: 7) X d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in theproject vicinity above levels existing without the project?(Sourese: 7) X e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 14 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?(Sources: ) X f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Sources: 1,7) Summary: The proposed project consists of the construction and use of an administration building, with parking facilities, on a site that already houses the operations and maintenance functions for the District, and does not create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise. However, there will be a temporary increase in noise.due to construction activities but because the project will be conditioned to work from 7:30am to 5:30pm on weekdays only and the site is located in a rural setting it a less than significant impact. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Sources: 7 X b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Sources:7) X c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Sources:7) X Summary: The proposed project does not induce substantial growth to the area because there are currently 13 employees on the site daily and as a result of this project 3 more employees would introduce to the site. Also, District Board meetings would be held on site once a month, in the afternoon, with five District members and District legal Counsel in attendance. In terms of public attendance at the meetings there are very few, if any,of the public that attend. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services?(Sources:7) l 15 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incomorated Impact fact 1. Fire Protection? X 2. Police Protection? X 3. Schools? X 4. Parks? X 5. Other public facilities? X Summary: The purpose of the proposed project is to consolidate the District staff into one location and, since the project is small in nature,'would not result in a substantial adverse impact to governmental facilities. XIV. RECREATION a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?(Sources: 7) X b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?(Sources: 7) X Summary: Implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase of 3 employees to the site each day. The increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks as a result of the proposed project would not be such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: a. 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 increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? (Sources:.7) X b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? X c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (Sources: 7) X d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g. farm equipment)?(Sources: 7) X e. Result in inadequate emergency access?(Sources: 7) X 16 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Fact Incomorated Im�act Impact f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?(Sources: 7) X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?(Sources: 1,7) X Summary: As noted above there are currently 13 employees and as a result of the project there would be an addition of 3 employees to the site each day which would add approximately 3 peak hour trips to the local roadway system. The proposed project is not expected to substantially increase traffic in the area. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project: a. Exceed. wastewater treatmentrequirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Sources: 7) X b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?(Sources: 7) X c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (Sources: 7) X d. Have sufficient water supplies available serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are newor expanded entitlements needed?(Sources: 7,11) X e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment . provider that 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: 7) X f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's waste disposal needs?(Sources: 7) X g. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?(Sources: 7) X Summary: if the proposed administration building will cause an increase in daily liquid waste flow the existing septic system must be upgraded to accommodate the increased flow and is subject to the requirements of the Contra Costa Health Services Department,Environmental Health as is the existing well that provides water to the site. Prior to issuance of building permits for the project the building plans shall be approved by the Contra Costa Health Services Department, Environmental Health. There is an existing detention basin on site with swales on the site which will be modified to include an8' bio-swale 17 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential 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? X b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X c. Does-the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Summary: The impacts of the proposed project are individually limited and are not cumulatively considerable. The proposed project would result in no environmental effects that would cause_substantial direct of indirect adverse effects on human beings. Exhibit 8 Notification List 10160009 10190004 10190006 HPH PROPERTIES LP BLOOMFIELD DAVID E BRENTWOOD MISSIONARY 1120 SECOND ST 1154 CENTERVILLE LN BAPTIST BRENTWOOD CA 94513 GARDNERVILLE NV 89460 631 EDWARDS ST CROCKETT CA 94525 10190007 10230001 EAST CCC IRRIGATION DISTRICT EAST CCC IRRIGATION DISTRICT 11010008 626 1 ST ST 626 1 ST ST BRENTWOOD CA 94513 BRENTWOOD CA 94513 11020001 11270001 MANZO JOSEPH & RAMONA TRE EAST CCC IRRIGATION DISTRICT 0 302 PIPPO AVE 626 1 ST ST BRENTWOOD CA 94513 BRENTWOOD CA 94513 East Contra Costa Fire District City of Brentwood 134 Oak Street 708 =3rd Street Brentwood, CA 94513 Brentwood, CA 94513 BUILDING INSPECTION ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PUBLIC WORKS Interoffice Interoffice ENGINEERING SERVICES Interoffice CONSERVATION &DEVELOPMENT CC FIRE ADVANCED PLANNING Interoffice Interoffice EastCounly limas Legal No. 0002950569 a�) NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY' 1700 Cavallo Road BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RED �"=3`''y��f D Antioch, CA 94509 ON PLANNING MATTERS � �;�� BRENTWOOD AREA (925) 779-7115 NOTICE Is hereby,given OCTQ that on Tuesday Otto- U ti 208 ber 7,2008 at 1:15 p.m., C in the County,Adminis- :ration Building, 651 Pine Street, Room 107 (Comer of Pine and CLERK BOARD Or SUPERViSdRS Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Escobar streets) Marti- CONTRA COSTA CO. Marti- nez,California,tke Con- June-Rm 106,651 Pine St., 1st Fl. tra Costa CountyBoard of Supervisors will hold Martinez CA 94553-1275 s public hearing to con- Sider the following plan- ning matter. REZONING AND DEVEL- PROOF OF PUBLICATION DPMENT PLAN applica- tions as described as follows: EAST CONTRA COSTA IR- FILE NO. 2185 ECC Irria Dist. RIGA71ON DISTRICT (ECCID) (Applicant & Owner): This pproject consists of the foliowIng In the matter of two related applica- tions: A) County File-#RZ07- 3192: The applicant re- q uests e-quests approval to rezone a 4.82 acre parcel from Exclusive Agricul- tural District (A-40) to I am a citizen of the United States=and a resident of the Count Planned Unit District(P- Y 1)with a variance to the aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or minimum area for non- residential use (4.9 interested inthe above-entitled matter. acres, where 10 acres are required);and B) County File #DP07- I am the Principal Legal Clerk of the East County Times, a 3050: The applicant re- questsapproval of a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published at 2640 Preliminary and Final Development Plan to Shadelands Drive in the City of Walnut Creek, County of Contra construct a 3,296 square foot administration Costa, 94598 building and associated parking facilities. The subl'ect site is locat- And which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general ed at 1711 Sellers Ave- nuecirculation by the Superior Court of the County of Contra Costa, aea.�(At40)he (ZA N 25) State of California,under the date of January 6, 1919. Case (CT:-19300-31.°00)( Parcel Number 8268. For purposes of compli- ance with the provisions of the California Envi- The notice, of which the annexed is arinted co a ronmental Quality Act P PY(set in YP not (cEQA),A Negative Dec- small than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire lara ion of Environmen- tal Significance (no En- issue of said newspaper.and not in any supplement thereof on the vironmental Impact Re- port required) has been following dates,to-Wit:.. issued for this project 9/29/2008 If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to rais- ing only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence deliv- ered to the County at,or Fprior to,the public hear- ing. Prior to the hearing, Community Develop- ment Department staff will be available on Tuesday,October 7,2006 at 12:30 pan. in Room - 108 Administration Building,651 Pine Street,. Martinez, to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer ' questions; (2) review ' the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3) clarify the issues being considered by the Board; and (4) provide an opportunity to Identi- fy, resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If . you wish to attend this meeting with staff, please call John Obome, tion and I certify(or declare)under the penalty of perjury " opmen aDepartment,y at that the foregoing is true and correct. (925 335-1207 by3:00 pp m. on Monday, Octo- ber 6, 2008 to confirm your participation. Executed at Walnut Creek, California. Date: September za, On this 29 day of September,2008 2008 David Twa Clerk of the Board o{ Supervisors and County Administrator Signature BJune McHuen,Deputy Crerk East CoWmes September 29,2008