Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11182008 - D.1 X sE Contra _� TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - ` Costa FROM: Catherine O. Kutsuris, Director 7 COUnty °°sT - - Department of Conservation and Development q � DATE: November 18, 2008 SUBJECT: HEARING ON A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM (SL) SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL- LOW DENSITY TO (CR) COMMERCIAL RECREATION AND A REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 38 ACRES FROM (A-2) GENERAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO (R-B) RETAIL BUSINESS DISTRICT. SUGAR BARGE RESORT/MARINA (API: 030-110- 006) IN THE BETHEL ISLAND AREA. RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC. (APPLICANT & OWNER) (COUNTY FILES: GP040001 AND RZ063187) (DISTRICT V) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: A. OPEN the public hearing and take testimony on the project B. CLOSE the public hearing C. FIND the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project to be adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: ❑ YES ❑ NO SIGNATURE —� ECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE— APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES : ACTION OF BOARD ON t 11 o APPROVED AS COMMEND X O/THHER O VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD AYES: NOES: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED I1 Ag/ B Contact:' Lashun Cross (925-335-1229) DAVID TWA, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND cc: Department of Conservation and Development(DCD) C UNTY ADMINISTRATOR Riggs Enterprises Inc. (Owner&Applicant) County Administrator's Office BY , DEPUTY Clerk of the Board County Counsel Public Works Engineering Department DCD-GIS File 1� November 18,2008 Board of Supervisors File#GP040001 &RZ063187 Page 2 D. ACCEPT the recommendation of the East County Regional Planning Commission (ECRPC), as contained in its Resolution No.18-2008, which is attached as Exhibit 1 of this Board Order. E. ADOPT the General Plan Amendment (County File #GP040001), including the change to the Land Use Element Map as the Fourth Consolidated General Plan Amendment for Calendar Year 2008. F. ADOPT the Rezoning (County File #RZ063187) of the subject site from A-2 General Agricultural District to R-B, Retail Business District, as recommended by the East County Regional Planning Commission G. ADOPT Ordinance No. 2008-31 giving effect to the aforementioned Rezoning. H. ADOPT the findings as contained in the proposed Board Resolution No. 2008/701 as the basis for the Board's action for the General Plan Amendment, which is attached under Exhibit 1 of this Board Order. I. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to post the'Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. FISCAL IMPACT None. The applicant is responsible for application processing costs. PROPOSED PROJECT The applicant requests approval of an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to change an approximately 38 acre site (APN: 030-110-006) from Single Family Residential - Low Density (SL) to Commercial Recreation (CR) and to rezone the property from General Agricultural District (A-2) to Retail Business District (R-B). The Land Use Permit and Development Plan applications linked to the Rezoning and General Plan Amendment will allow the expansion of the Sugar Barge Resort and Marina by adding 19 metal buildings for dry boat storage, and establishing outdoor Dry. Boat and Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage with parking. The proposed land use permit and development plan was approved by the East County Regional Planning Commission on September 8, 2008. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS A. General Plan Amendment The subject parcel totaling 38 acres is currently designated Single Family Residential - Low Density (SL) under the Land Use Element Map to the Contra Costa General Plan (2005-2020) and located "on-island" within the unincorporated Bethel Island area of the county. The site is bordered on the north and east by Willow Road and single family residences within a Water Recreational Zoning District (F-1). The south and west sides of the subject parcel are developed and undeveloped parcels zoned General.Agricultural (A-2). November 18, 2008 Board of Supervisors File#GP040001 &RZO63187 Page 3 The applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment from SL (Single Family Residential - Low Density) to CR (Commercial Recreation). Riggs Enterprises, Inc. is seeking to expand the "Sugar Barge Resort and Marina," a privately owned recreational facility open to the public for recreational purposes, with additional indoor dry boat storage with the construction of prefabricated buildings and outdoor RV and boat storage area. The request for a General Plan Amendment is reasonable given that the property is contiguous to the existing water oriented commercial recreational facility, operated by Riggs Enterprises, Inc. The Sugar Barge Resort and Marina facility is generally consistent with policies for the Bethel Island area in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The site is vacant and topographically level with some depressions located on the north and western portions of the land. The proposal does not impact the island's perimeter levee. B. Rezoning The subject property is surrounded on the south, east and west by A-2 (General Agricultural). To the north of the site is the top of the levee and property designated F-1 (Water Recreational District).,To the south and abutting the property is one parcel zoned R-40 (Single Family Residential, 40,000 square feet minimum lot size). Immediately to the east is the existing Sugar Barge recreational facility which is zoned R-B (Retail Business District). The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject site from A-2 (General Agriculture) to R-B (Retail Business District). Adoption of this rezoning would benefit the boating community by providing additional storage space of RVs and boats. C. East County Regional Planning Commission The East County Regional Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed project on July 14, 2008. At the hearing several members of the public commented on the project. The comments made were predominantly in regards to compliance with previous conditions under the original land use permit and traffic on Willow Road. After taking public testimony, the Commission continued the item to September 8, 2008 allowing staff additional time to respond to a letter submitted by the City of Oakley, research the Deferred Improvement Agreement on Sugar Barge Road, and obtain additional information on possible RV leakage and impacts to the groundwater. On September 8, 2008, after,evaluating the project in its entirety, including all public testimony and evidence in the record, the Commission unanimously voted to approve the land use and development plan application and to recommend the Board approve the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. ADDENDUM November 18, 2008,Agenda Item D.1 On this day,the Board of Supervisors conducted a hearing to consider approval of General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Land Use Designation from(SL) Single Family Residential-Low Density to(CR) Commercial Recreation and a Rezoning to change the zoning designation from(A-2) General Agricultural District to (R-B)Retail Business District for Assessor Parcel No. 030-110-006, as 38-acre site located south of Willow Road and north of Sugar Barge Road in the Bethel Island area. Patrick Roche, Conservation and Development Department, introduced the item and presented slides to show maps and aerial overviews of the area under consideration. He said the area is currently zoned with the possibility of being residential, but if rezoned could fill a need for the area by providing boat storage. The Chair opened the hearing and called for public comment. The following people spoke: David Riggs, Bethel Island resident, requested the Board vote to approve this item,noting that neighbors could benefit from a mutual aide agreement for drinking water and fire systems. James Stitch, Bethel Island resident, spoke in opposition to the proposed action, citing a potential negative effect on property values and increased noise,traffic and pollution. John Gennrich, Bethel Island resident, said the project will help ensure water services on the island. Todd Northam,Bethel Island resident, spoke in opposition to the proposed action saying there is already too much traffic on the island. Supervisor Piepho noted the Department of Conservation and Development has been working on the issue of boat storage in the Delta region and recognizes that more than one Delta community should be providing storage. She said this topic will be returning to the Board at a future date. Supervisor Bonilla asked about barricades or traffic calming possibilities on Willow Road. Ms. Kutsuris responded that because it is a public road she would not advocate putting up any barricades, but said she could work with the applicant to look into signage or other ways to encourage alternate routes. By a unanimous vote of 4-0 with Supervisor Glover absent, the Board of Supervisors took the following action.- OPENED ction.OPENED the public hearing;RECEIVED public testimony; CLOSED the public hearing; FOUND the Mitigate Negative Declaration prepared for the project to be adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act;ADOPTED the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program;ACCEPTED the recommendation of the East County Regional Planning Commission(ECRPC)as contained in its Resolution No. 18-2008; ADOPTED the General Plan Amendment(County File#GP04001) including the change to the Land Use Element Map as the Fourth Consolidated General Plan Amendment for Calendar Year 2008; ADOPTED the Rezoning(County File #RZ063187)of the subject site from A-2 General Agricultural District to R-B,Retail Business District,as recommended by the ECRPC; ADOPTED Ordinance No. 2008-31 giving effect to the Rezoning; ADOPTED findings in Board Order Resolution No. 2008/701 as the basis for the Board's action for the General Plan Amendment; and DIRECTED the Department of Conservation and Development to post the Noticeof Determination with the County Clerk. l 'November 18,2008 Board of Supervisors File#GP040001 &RZ063187 Page 4 Exhibits 1. Rezoning Ordinance No. 2008-31 and Board Resolution No. 2008/701 2. East County Regional Planning Commission Resolution No. 18-2008 3. Conditions of Approval 4. CEQA determination 5. July 14, 2008 and September 8, 2008 Staff Reports 6. Notification List 7. Maps and Plans EXHIBIT 1 Rezoning Ordinance No. 2008-31 Board Resolution No. 2008-70.1 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OFCONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on Tuesday, November 18, 20089 by the following vote: AYES: 6001 A, VI L-Jr-E AA, f IE?H© .50,M I" A NOES: ABSENT: &-Lwe- ABSTAIN: RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 SUBJECT: SUGAR BARGE MARINA AND RESORT PROJECT } APPLICATION FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM (SL) SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY.TO (CR) } COMMERCIAL RECREATION (COUNTY FILE: GP040001), AND REZONING FROM A-2 TO R-B } (COUNTY FILE RZ063187)WITININ THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF BETHEL ISLAND, } DISTRICT V WHEREAS, Riggs Enterprises Inc. (Applicant and Owners) proposed development of approximately 38 acres in the unincorporated Bethel`Island area of Contra Costa County comprised of one parcel with Assessor's Parcel Number 030-110-006 to construct 19 prefabricated metal buildings on paved asphalt occupying 10.5 acres for boat storage; installation of compacted gravel on 13 acres for open storage°area for approximately 200 boats and recreational vehicles and 50 parking spaces with access controlled by a security fence, for which an application was received by the Department of Conservation and Development on March 29, 2005; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines, a report dated February 15, 2006 titled "LP052026" was prepared to RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 1 determine whether an environmental impact report should be prepared for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study identified potential significant impacts related to biological, cultural, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, and the initial study recommended mitigation measures which would reduce each identified impact to a less than significant level; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 2006 the County published a Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigation Negative Declaration, which Notice recited the foregoing facts, indicated that the Applicant had agreed to accept each mitigation measure recommended by the Initial Study, started a period for public comments on adequacy of the environmental documents related to the Project that ran to July 27, 2006; and WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the East County Regional Planning Commission on Monday, July 14, 2008, which was subsequently continued to September 8, 2008 to allow staff time to respond and research additional questions from the Commission, where all persons interested therein might appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2008, the East County Regional Planning Commission having fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter and forwarded a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to approve the project as contained in its Resolution No. 18-2008; and WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, November 18, 2008, where all persons interested therein might appear and be heard; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors ("the Board") 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 Board FINDS that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") is adequate for the purposes of compliance with CEQA and ADOPTS the MND for the Project. In support of these actions and conclusions, this Board ADOPTS the CEQA Findings. This Board adopts these findings specifically for each of the Approvals and Entitlements it approves or recommends for approval for the Project. This Board certifies that it has been presented with the Initial Study and that it has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 2 Study and the other information in the record prior to making the following recommendations, determinations, and findings. The Board further certifies that the Initial Study reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis, and that the Initial Study has been completed in compliance with CEQA regulations. 2. ADOPTS the proposed General Plan Amendment (County File #GP040001) as part of the 4th Consolidated General Plan Amendment for 2008, which changes the General Plan Land Use Element Map land use designations for the subject site from Single Family Residential (SL) to Commercial Recreation (CR) as illustrated on the map under Figure 1 which is attached'. 3. ADOPTS the proposed Rezoning (County File #RZ063187), changing the zoning designation of the subject site from A-2, General Agricultural District to R-B, Retail Business District, as described under Ordinance No. 2008-31. BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for these recommendations are as follows: FINDINGS I. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: There will be an increase in traffic mainly on the holidays with the additional storage units. The project will 'generate an increase in additional AM and PM peak hour trips periodically. The applicant is required to make roadway improvements on Sugar Barge Road and convey to the County by offer of dedication additional right of way at certain locations along Sugar Barge Road and Willow Road right of way that are abrupt..angle points to "smooth out" the alignment to allow for future widening: No preparation of a traffic report pursuant to the 1988 Measure C requirements is warranted. 2. Drainage and Flood Control: The applicant is required to collect and convey all stormwaters entering or originating within the -project to an adequate natural or manmade water course. Issuance of grading or building permits shall not be issued- until the collect and convey requirements and improvements have been met. The property is within the Flood Hazard Area, and will be subject to meet . the requirements of the Floodplain Management Ordinance. . RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 3 3. Water and Waste Disposal: The project site is within the Ironhouse Sanitary District service area. The Districts' have indicated that capacity ' exists to support the development. 4. Fire Protection: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant is required to demonstrate that all of the proposed development complies with the rules and regulations of the District. 5. Public Protection: The Growth Management Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff facility station per 1,000 population. The small population increase associated with this project is not considered significant. The applicant is will be establishing a security gate for additional protection. 6. Parks & Recreation: The proposed project will not have a minor cumulative effect on demand for park and recreation facilities, and is not subject to payment of park dedication fees as the project is a recreational facility. II. Findings for Adoption of a Rezoning (County File:RZ063187) 1. Required Finding: The change proposed will substantially comply with the General Plan, as proposed for amendment under County File #GP040001. Project Finding: The property is zoned A-2 (General Agricultural)„ and the rezoning is to establish a use that is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the proposed Retail Business District complies with the range of recreational uses outlined in the General Plan and is also consistent with the specific polices for the Bethel Island area. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is in compliance with the General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible within the district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts. Project Finding: Developing the subject property into dry boat and RV storage is compatible with the existing land use district already established on the adjacent property and other properties in the area. 3. Required Finding: Community need has been demonstrated for the use proposed, but this does not require demonstration of future financial success. RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 4 Proiect Finding: The area demonstrates a need for recreational and boat storage of this nature, since the development of approximately 1300 single family residences off-island is anticipated with the completion of Cypress Lakes. This project enhances the recreational quality of 'the area while providing resources available to the community for storing equipment tied to water oriented recreation off of single family residential zoned properties. The rezoning of the property allows the County to fulfill this need. A. The Board has fully evaluated the extent to which the Project achieves each policy, including those pertaining to compatibility of land uses, compliance with principles of Urban Limit Line and Measure C-1990, protection of open space, standards regarding geology, soils, and earthquake risks, hazardous materials, flood hazards, and drainage, protection of water quality, protection of biological resources, transportation standards and goals, regional and,local housing needs, jobs/housing balance, noise, protection of air quality, protection of visual resources, standards for public services and utilities, protection of archaeological and historical resources. The Board has also fully considered the Project's compliance with all performance standards in the General Plan, including the Growth Management Element policies and standards (including those for traffic levels of service), and performance standards for public services and facilities. B. The Board finds that through the development of additional indoor and outdoor RV and boat storage space, the Project will help implement the Bethel Island related goals of the General Plan. III. Measure C-1998 and Related Resolutions A. The Board has considered the Project's compliance with the traffic ' service objectives of Measure C-1998, the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program and related Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) resolutions. B. Measure C-1988 established a Growth Management Program, to assure that future residential, business and commercial growth pays for the facilities required to meet the demands resulting from that growth." TheProgram requires the County to adopt Traffic Level of Service (LOS) Standards keyed to types of land use, and to comply with the adopted standards; to "adopt a development mitigation program to ensure that new growth is paying its share of the costs associated . with that growth;" to participate in the forum established by the RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 5 Authority to cooperate in easing cumulative traffic impacts, using the CCTA computer model; and to develop an implementation program that creates housing opportunities for all income levels. C. The County has complied with all these requirements. Most important, the County is achieving Measure C-1988's overarching goal that development pay its own way. The County has identified Project;conditions to ensure that the Applicant will defray the cost of those improvements that are proportionately attributable to the development. G:\Current Planning\curr-plan\staff reports\GP040001boardreso.doc -6- I 6- hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: jp-I p Clerk of the Board of Supdrvis rs and Cg-unty Administrator By Deputy RESOLUTION NO.2008/701 6 ORDINANCE NO. 2008 - 31 (Re-Zoning Land in the Bethel Island Area) i' The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: SECTION I: Page E-28 & F-28 of the County's 2005 Zoning Map(Ord. No. 2005-03) is amended by re-zoning the land in the above area shown shaded on the map(s)attached hereto and incorporated herein (see also Community Development Department File No. lZ -063187 ) FROM: Land Use District A-2 -FH ( General Agricultural (Flood Hazard Overlay) ) TO: Land Use District R-B -FH ( Retail Business (Flood Hazard Overlay) } and the Community Development Director shall change the Zoning Map accordingly, pursuant to Ordinance Code Sec. 84.2.002. R-B -FH s.wmow A-2 �m K a R-B -FH ; Southwind'St 4Po Sugar•Barge Rd -40 -F \ 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 �rs,.�c�n• 4Ey /� , a newspaper published.in this County. PASSED on 6 v 9 by the following vote: Supervisor Ave No Absent Abstain 1. J. Gioia O O ( ) 2. G.B. Uilkema O O ( ) 3. M.N. Piepho . 4. S. Bonilla 5. F.D. Glover O O D4 ( ) ATTEST John Cullen, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Chairman of the Board y Dep. (SEAL) ORDINANCE NO. 2008 - 31 RZ063187-David Riggs Findings Map -B -F o` -B 4'Yi/ipwRa ` R-B -FH `♦ A-2 o 4 d a a . ��,ceert`pr a ` N �P,] ` R-B -FH��cas.Q Sugar_BargeRd R-40 -FH Rezone from A-2 -FH to R-B -FH Bethel Island Area j, 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 E-28 & F-28 of the County's 2005 zoning map. indicating thereon the decision of the Contra Costa County Planning. Commission in the matter of David Riggs - RZ063187 ATTEST: Secretary of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission, State of Calf: Figure 1 , Resolution No. 2008/71 ,Land Use Element Map Change: Sugar Barge Resort / Marina Current General Plan CR AL � -------- SITE: Sugar Barge WA Resort / Marina,3 APN 030-1.10-006 o co L SL S'quthw.ind�st 2 Sugar Barge Rd �o- OS Legend ® Site CR (Commercial Recreation) D Parcels 0 PR (Parks and Recreation) General Plan D OS (Open Space) SL(Single Family Residential - Low) AL(Agricultural Lands) = SH (Single Family Residential - High) WA(Water) Proposed General Plan ,SH'. AL ct? WA C o SITE: Sugar Barge Resort / Marina,3 APN 030-110-006 Sugar Barge.Rtl 2. co , SL N QOS Map created 11/04/2008 Feet by Contra Costa Conservation and Development Department 0 1,320 1;980 2,640 Community Development Division--GIS Group 0 330 66 651 Pine Street,4th Floor North Win Martinez,CA 94553-0095 37:59:48.455N 122:06:35.384W This map contains copyrighted information and may not be altered. It may be reProduced in its current state if the source is cited.Users of this map agree to read and r - accept the County of Contra Costa disclaimer of liability for 9eo9raphic information. EXHIBIT 2 East County Regional Planning Commission , Resolution No. 18-2008 1 RESOLUTION NO. 18-2008 RESOLUTION OF THE EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE REQUESTED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING INCORPORATING FINDINGS FOR THE LAND USE PERMIT "SUGAR BARGE MARINA AND RESORT" PROJECT IN THE BETHEL ISLAND AREA OF SAID COUNTY: WHEREAS, Riggs Enterprises Inc. (Applicant and Owners) proposed development of approximately 38 acres in the unincorporated Bethel Island area of Contra Costa County comprised of one parcel with Assessor's Parcel Number 030-110-006 to construct 19 prefabricated metal buildings on paved asphalt occupying 10.5 acres for boat storage; installation of compacted gravel on 13 acres for open storage area for approximately 200 boats and recreational vehicles and 50 parking spaces with access controlled by a security fence, for which an application was received by the Department of Conservation and Development on March 29, 2005; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines, a report dated February 15, 2006 titled "LP052026" was prepared to determine whether an environmental impact report should be prepared for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study identified potential significant impacts related to biological, cultural, geology and soils,hydrology and water quality, and the initial study recommended mitigation measures which would reduce each identified impact to a less than significant level; and WHEREAS, on June 26,2006 the County published a Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigation Negative Declaration, which Notice recited the foregoing facts,indicated that the Applicant had agreed to accept each mitigation measure recommended by the Initial Study, started a period for public comments on adequacy of the environmental documents related to the Project that ran to July 27, 2006; and WHEREAS,.after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the East County Regional Planning Commission on Monday, July 14, 2008, which was subsequently continued to September 8, 2008 to allow staff time to respond and research additional questions from the Commission, where all persons interested therein might appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2008, the East County Regional Planning Commission having 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: 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND") is adequate for the purposes of compliance with CEQA and ADOPTS the MND for the Project. In support of these actions and conclusions, this 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. RESOLUTION NO. 18-2008 1 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 regulations. 2. RECOMMENDS to the Board of Supervisors APPROVAL of the proposed General Plan Amendment (County File #.GP040001) changing the General Plan land use designations for the subject property from Single Family Residential Low-Density (SL) to Commercial Recreation (CR) and recommends that the Board ADOPT the findings. 3. RECOMMENDS to the Board of Supervisors APPROVAL of the proposed Rezoning (County File # RZ063187), changing the zoning designation of the property from General Agricultural District (A-2) to Retail Business District (R-B) BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for these recommendations are as Follows: FINDINGS FOR LAND USE PERMIT (County File#LP05-2026) I. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffi : 'There will be an increase in traffic mainly on the holidays with the additional storage units. The project will generate an increase in additional AM and PM peak hour trips periodically. The applicant is required to make safety enhancements to Willow Road along the parcel frontage and convey to the County by offer of dedication additional right of way at certain locations along Willow Roadright of way that are abrupt angle points to "smooth out" the alignment to allow for future widening. No preparation of a traffic report pursuant to the 1988 Measure C requirements is warranted. 2. Drainage and Flood Control: The applicant is required to collect and convey all stormwaters entering or originating within the project to an adequate natural or manmade water course. Issuance of grading or building permits shall not be issued until the collect and convey requirements and improvements have been met. The property is within the Flood Hazard Area; and will be subject to meet the requirements of the Floodplain Management Ordinance. 3. Water and Waste Disposal: The project site is within the Ironhouse Sanitary District service area. The Districts' have indicated that capacity exists to support the development. 4. Fire Protection: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant is required to demonstrate that all of the proposed development complies with the rules and regulations of the District. 5. Public Protection: The Growth Management Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff facility station per 1,000 population. The small population increase associated with this project is not considered significant. The applicant is will be establishing a security gate for additional protection. RESOLUTION NO. 18-2008 2 6. Parks & Recreation: The proposed project will not have a minor cumulative effect on demand for park and recreation facilities, and is not subject to payment of park dedication fees as the project is a recreational facility. II. General Plan Consistency A. The Project is consistent with the General Plan as proposed for amendment. The General Plan Amendment approved for this project will not cause the General Plan to become internally inconsistent. The Project proposes a General Plan Amendment to redesignate approximately 38 acres from SL, Single Family Residential to CR,"Commercial Recreation. The General Plan Amendment and the remainder of the General Plan comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the County. The various land uses authorized for the Project, and each of its components, are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan. The Project is compatible with and conforms to the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The Project will further the objectives and policies of the General Plan and not obstruct their attainment. B. The Commission has considered the effects of the Project on the housing needs of the region and balanced those needs against the public service needs of County residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. The Project helps to achieve a desirable balance. The Project is in Harmony with surrounding neighborhoods, and the site as designed for the Project is physically suitable for the development proposed. C. The General Plan comprises many objectives, policies, principles, programs, standards, proposals and action plans (collectively "policies"), as well as performance standards. At times the policies necessarily compete with each other. Examples of the tension between General Plan policies are found between those policies that promote managed growth, and those that provide for protection of resources that exist because land is undeveloped (such as open space, visual resources and agricultural land). As part of approving the Project, all applicable General Plan policies and the extent to which the Project conforms to each of those policies have been considered. D. The Commission has fully evaluated the extent to which the Project achieves each policy, including those pertaining to compatibility of land uses, compliance with principles of Urban Limit Line and Measure C-199.0,protection of open space, standards regarding geology, soils, and earthquake risks,.hazardous materials, flood hazards, and drainage, protection of water quality,_protection of biological resources, transportation standards and goals, regional and local housing needs,jobs/ housing balance, noise, protection of air quality, protection of visual resources, standards for public services and utilities, protection of archaeological and historical resources. The Commission has also fully considered the Project's compliance with all performance standards in the General Plan, including the Growth Management Element policies and standards (including those for traffic levels of service), and performance standards for public services and facilities. E. The Commission finds that through the development of additional indoor and outdoor RV and boat storage space, the Project will help implement the Bethel Island related goals of the General Plan. RESOLUTION NO. 18-2008 3 IV. Measure C-1998 and Related Resolutions A. The Commission has considered the Project's compliance with the traffic service objectives of Measure C-1998, the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program and related Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) resolutions. B. Measure C-1988 established a Growth Management Program, "to assure that.future residential, business and commercial growth pays for the facilities required to meet the demands resulting from that growth." The Program requires the County to adopt Traffic Level of Service (LOS) Standards keyed to types of land use, and to comply with the adopted standards; to "adopt a development mitigation program to ensure that new growth is paying its share of the costs associated with that growth;"to participate in the forum established by.the Authority to cooperate in easing cumulative traffic impacts, using the CCTA computer model; and to develop an implementation program that creates housing opportunities for all income levels. C. The County has complied with all these requirements. Most important, the County is achieving Measure C-1988's overarching goal that development pay its own way. The County has identified Project conditions to ensure that the Applicant will defray the cost of those improvements that are proportionately attributable to the development. WHEREAS, at the September 8, 2008 hearing the Commission modified the conditions of approval to include the following: COA#6 Hours of operation shall be limited from dawn to dusk. COA451 Prior to_approval, the final Storinwater Control Plan shall adequately demonstrate that the "non- traditional".Stormwater Management BMP features (such as CDS units, natural swales, etc.) proposed in the preliminary Stormwater Control Plan shall be shown to provide a degree of stormwater treatment compliant with the NPDES permit and/or equivalent to the degree of treatment provided by•traditional BMPs designed and sized in accordance with the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. The final Stormwater Control Plan shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Health Services Department (Environmental Health Division) or other appropriate regulatory agency,that this development will not significantly impact water quality in nearby drinking wells. NOW BE IT RESOLVED that the Secretary 6f 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. r RESOLUTION NO. 18=2008 4 This Resolution was approved upon motion of the East County Regional Planning Commission on Monday, September 8, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Hanna, Stevenson, Pigati, and Day NOES: , None ABSENT: MacVittie ABSTAIN: None Walter MacVittie, Chair of the East County Regional Planning Commission County of Contra Costa, State of California ATTEST: .-Catherine O. Kutsuris, Secretary County of Contra Costa State of California Contact: Lashun Cross, Planning Div., DCD(335-1229) cc: Department of Conservation and Development CAO County Counsel Riggs Enterprise (O&A) Public Works Department-Engineering DCD-GIS File RESOLUTION NO. 18-2008 5 . f EXHIBIT 3 Conditions of Approval FINDINGS, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A LAND USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN COUNTY FILE #LP052026 PER SEPTEMBER 8, 2008 EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL A. Growth Management Performance Standards 1. Traffic: There will be an increase in traffic mainly on the holidays with the additional storage units. The project will generate an increase in additional AM and PM peak hour trips periodically. The applicant is required to make safety enhancements to Willow Road along the parcel frontage and convey to the County by offer of dedication additional right of way at certain locations along Willow Road right of way that are abrupt angle points to "smooth out" the alignment to allow for future widening. No preparation of a traffic report pursuant to the 1988 Measure C requirements is warranted. 2. Drainage and Flood Control: The applicant is required to collect and convey all stormwaters entering or,originating within the proj ect to an adequate natural or manmade water course. Issuance of grading or building permits shall not be issued until the collect and convey requirements and improvements have been met. The property is within the Flood Hazard Area, and will be subject to meet the requirements of the Floodplain Management Ordinance. 3. Water and Waste Disposal: The project site is within the Ironhouse Sanitary District service area. The Districts' .have indicated that capacity exists to support the development. 4. Fire Protection: Prior to the is of a building permit, the applicant is required to demonstrate that all of the proposed development complies with the rules and regulations of the District. 5. Public Protection: The Growth Management Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff facility station per 1,000 population. The small population increase associated with this .project is not considered significant. The applicant is will be establishing a security gate for additional protection. 6. Parks & Recreation: The proposed project will not have a minor cumulative effect on demand for park and recreation facilities, and is not subject to payment of park dedication fees as the project is a recreational facility. B. Findings for Approval of a Rezoning 1. Required Finding: The change proposed will substantially comply with the general plan. { Conditions of Approval 2' Project Finding: The property is zoned A-2 (General Agricultural)„ and the rezoning is to establish a use that is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the proposed Retail Business District complies with the range of recreational uses outlined in the General Plan and is also consistent with the specific polices for the Bethel Island area. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is in compliance with the General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are :compatible within the district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts. Project Finding: Developing the subject property into dry boat and RV storage is compatible with the existing land use district already established on the adjacent property and other properties in the area. 3. Required Finding: Community need has been demonstrated for the use proposed, but this does not require demonstration of future financial success. Project Finding: The area demonstrates a need for recreational and boat storage of this nature, since the development of approximately 1300 single family residences off-island is anticipated with the completion of Cypress Lakes. This project enhances the recreational quality of the area while providing resources available to the .community for storing equipment tied to water oriented recreation off of single family residential zoned properties. The rezoning of the property allows the County to fulflll this need. C. Findings for Adopting a Development Plan Approval of a Final Development Plan 1. Required Finding: The proposal is consistent with the purpose of the affected zoning district. Project Finding: The applicant has expressed a desire to begin construction immediately after required permits and compliance with the conditions.of approval have been granted. 2. Required Finding: The proposal is architecturally compatible with other uses in the vicinity,both inside and outside the affected zoning district. Project Finding: The area is characterized primarily by residential development within a water recreational zoning district and large areas of underutilized lands. The proposed development will be of a quality that shall match the existing dry boat storage and recreational development directly north and northeast of the property. The addition of the landscaping plan will increase the visual and aesthetic characteristic of the project. This use of the subject property helps fulfill the policies within the General Plan. Conditions of Approval 3 D. Findings to Establish a Land Use Permit 1. The proposed land use shall not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the County because use of the property for dry boat and RV storage is compatible with the neighborhood and existing Sugar Barge Resort and Marina. The proposed use is a use that has been previously established on the adjacent property with the granting of a approved land use permit. 2. The proposed project shall not adversely affect the orderly development of property within the County because the proposal for an expansion of the existing recreational facility to allow dry boat and RV storage would be incidental to Sugar Barge Marina and is a use that can be found consistent with the proposed (R-B) Retail Business zoning and (CR) Commercial Recreation General Plan designation. 3. The proposed,project shall not adversely affect.the preservation of property values and the protection of the tax base within the County because the site will be zoned Retail Business which allows for the establishment of outdoor storage with the discretionary review and approval of a Land Use Permit. 4. The proposed project shall not adversely affect the policy and goals as set by the General Plan. The site's proposed General Plan Amendment designation is Commercial Recreation (CR)..A goal of the General Plan is to provide a range of commercial and recreational uses typically found in small scale neighborhoods including retail and personal service facilities. The proposed permit to allow expansion of the Sugar Barge facility for dry boat and RV storage is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. 5. The proposed project shall not create a nuisance and /or enforcement problem within the neighborhood or community because use of the dry boat and RV storage facilities will have a security gate with access hours between 6 A.M. to 9 P.M. 6. The .project shall not encourage marginal development within the, neighborhood. The submitted plans indicate use and design that is compatible and appropriate with the adjacent surroundings and districts. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL General 1. This approval is based upon the exhibits received by the Community Development Department listed as follows: Approved pursuant to Plans as Generally Shown on the revised Development Plans: Conditions of Approval 4 A. Sheets Cl to 6 and .L1 to LS dated received by the Community Development Department on February 7, 2006. Included in these plan's are the following details: Sheet Numbers Description C2 Site Development Plan C3 Grading and Drainage Plan C4 Grading Cross Sections C5 Erosion Control Plan L1-L2 Planting Plan Details L3-L4 Irrigation Plan The approval is also based upon the following reports: B. A Cultural/Archaeological Assessment of a 38 acre Parcel (APN 030- 110-006), Located at Willow Road., Bethel Island, Contra Costa County, California. Prepared by LSA Associates Inc. November 6, 2002. C. Biological Reconnaissance Assessment for the Field Property, Willow Road, Contra Costa County California. Prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. October 28, 2002. D. Geotechnical Investigation Report for the proposed project on the subject parcel, Located at Willow Road was prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. on January 26, 2000 and revised on February 2000. E. USACE letter regarding Verification for the Wetland Delineation and Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination for the Site, Contra Costa County, California. May 3, 2000. F. Wetland Delineation, Field Property, Willow Road. Prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. Consulting. July 22, 1998. Verified by USACE. 2. The Land Use Permit Approval is Contingent on the following Board of Supervisors actions; A. Approval of the proposed General Plan amendment, County File GP04-0001. B. Approval of the Rezoning application, County File RZ063187. Payment of Any Supplemental Application Fees Due 3. This application is subject to an initial application fees of($37,530.00), which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the Conditions of Approval 5 application review expenses exceed 100% of the initial fee. Any additional fee due must be paid within 60 days of the permit effective date or prior to use of the permit whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance plus five working days for file preparation. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. If additional fees are owed, a bill will be sent to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. 4. Compliance Report — At least 45 days prior to filing a final map or issuance of grading permit, which ever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a report on compliance with the conditions of approval with this permit for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The fee for this application is a deposit of$1,000 that is subject to time and materials costs. Should staff costs exceed the deposit, additional fees will be required. A. Except for those conditions administered by the Public Works Department, the report shall list each condition followed by a description of what the applicant has provided as evidence of compliance with that condition. The report shall also indicate whether the applicant believes that he has done all the applicant is in a position to do to comply with the applicable condition. (A copy of the conditions of approval may be available; to obtain a copy, contact Current Planning at 335-1210.) B. Unless otherwise indicated,the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the condition of this report prior to filing the final map. Lighting Control 5. All outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed and located to minimize ambient light levels consistent with public safety standards. Area lighting shall be directed downward with no splay of lighting directed offsite. Outdoor lighting that is greater than ten feet high shall incorporate a cut-off shield that prevents the light source from being directly visible from areas offsite. No lighting shall blink, flash, or be of unusual high intensity or brightness.Ten days prior to the request or issuance of building permits to install lighting on-site the applicant shall provide; a lighting plan for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Hours of Operation 6. Hours of operation shall be limited from dawn to dusk. Final Landscape Plan 7. Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits, the applicant shall submit a Final Landscape plan consisting of pest-resistant plants and plantings appropriate to site soil, climate, wind, and.rain. In addition, the Conditions of Approval '6- plans shall be designed to minimize use of fertilization, irrigation and accommodate the anticipated runoff as shown in the preliminary approved Stormwater Control Plan dated February 7, 2006. The Final Landscape plans must be detailed and prepared by a certified and/or licensed landscape architect or botanist and submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. 8. The Final.Plan shall. be designed in accordance with the landscape plain exhibit on sheets L1-5 of the development plans, the Stormwater Control Plan, and the Water Conservation Ordinance and shall be installed prior occupancy of any of the dry boat storage prefabricated metal buildings. Parking 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed paved parking spaces are 9 ft by 19ft in dimension, -Handicapped spaces shall be appropriately identified and in compliance with ADA (American Disability Act), and a minimum of 10 spaces are provided to accommodate temporary vehicular parking for customers. Biological 10: Pre-construction surveys of all potential raptor nesting habitat within 500 feet of the project site shall occur within 30 days of ground disturbing activities/project construction. If occupied raptor nests are found within 250 feet of the proposed construction area, a protection zone shall be established around the nest with orange construction fencing and/or staking that shall remain until the juveniles have fledged and are independent of the nest. The. width of raptor nest protection zones will be variable and established based on site specific conditions such as the individual raptors/species tolerance to activity and screening vegetation or topography. The protection zones will be established by a qualified wildlife biologist in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. No Construction or earth moving activity shall occur within the designated buffer until it is determined that the species have fledged or attain sufficient skills to avoid project zones. (MM Biology) 11. Prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit a Pre-construction survey for western pond turtle and giant garter snake shall be conducted by a qualified biologist not more than 48 hours in advance of ground disturbing activities/ project construction. ,All suitable habitat on and immediately adjacent (within 100 feet) to the project site shall be surveyed. If evidence of either species' is found, the appropriate State and Federal agencies shall be contacted prior to commencement of any construction on site. (MM Biology) Conditions of Approval 7 12. At least 30 days prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits the applicant shall provide a copy of the individual permit authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and a copy of the permit application with supporting documentation such as the wetlands mitigation plan and 404 (b)(1) alternative analysis. In addition, the applicant shall provide a copy of the Water. Quality Certification form the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. (MM Biology) In accordance with the U.S. Army Corps.of Engineers requirement for the permanent fill of 0.68 acres of unavoidable, wetlands impacts shall be mitigated through the creation of new seasonal wetlands off-site at the approved Elsie Gridley Mitigation Bank. Wetlands shall be created at a ratio of 1:1 (created:filled). The applicant shall provide evidence to the Community Development Department that the created new seasonal wetlands has been implemented and accepted by the USACE. (MM Biology- Wetlands will be replaced.) Cultural 13. At least 30 days prior to the issuance of grading and building permits the developer shall obtain a contract at the developers expense with a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities within the project area until final grade has been achieved or to such time the monitor concludes that monitoring is no longer necessary. A copy of the contract, the schedule of construction days indicating the days the monitor is to be present shall be provided for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Ground disturbing activities include but are riot limited to excavation, auguring, grading, dredging, clearing, grubbing, and any stump removal. (MM Cultural) 14. If deposits of prehistoric archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, the on site archaeological monitor should be notified immediately. All work within 50 feet of the discovery should be redirected until the archaeologist monitor can examine the finds and make recommendations. (MM Cultural) 15. Prehistoric materials can include flaked stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, choppers) or obsidian, chert, or quartzite tool, making debris, midden (i.e., culturally darkened soil often containing heat affected rock, ash, and charcoal, shellfish remains, and cultural materials); and stone milling equipment (e.g. mortars, pestles, hand stones). Historical materials may include wood, metal, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. (MM Cultural) w1i Conditions of Approval $' 16. If archaeological deposits are identified, it is recommended that such deposits be avoided by project activities. If the deposits can not be avoided, they should be evaluated to determine whether they are eligible for listing, adverse effects to it will need to be avoided or mitigated. Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site of any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the County has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroner's authority. If human remains are encountered the on-site archaeologist monitor should be informed immediately. Work should halt within 50 feet of the find and the County Coroner notified. If the remain are of North American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of identification. (MM Cultural) Geology and Soils 17. At least 30 days prior to requesting construction permits (i.e grading and building permits), the applicant shall submit an updated geotechnical report that a) provides an additional subsurface data to evaluate the geometry and thickness of the sand, b) provides an assessment of the liquefaction potential of the associated hazards, explaining details of the methodology/parameters assumptions used in the analysis; c) provide practical measures to control/avoid damage from liquefaction, andd) provide testing protocols to confirm 'that adequate mitigation has been achieved (do not assume remediation is not feasible/nor required). (MM-Geology) The updated geotechnical report and chemical testing data shall be subject to the review and approval of the County Zoning Administrator and County Geologist and accompanied with a fee of$750 made payable to the Contra Costa County Community Development Department. (MM-Geology) 18. Prior to the issuance of any type of construction/grading permits, chemical testing of representative building pad soils shall be submitted for the review and approval of. the Zoning Administrator and County Geologist to determine the level of corrosive protection required for steel and concrete materials uses for construction. The following measures shall be implemented where appropriate to protect against corrosion: use of sulfate- resistant concrete and use of protective linings to encase steel piping buried in native soils. (MM-Geology) 19. The Geotechnical Engineer shall a) review and approve grading,.drainage and foundation plans prior to the issuance of construction/grading permits by providing a dated and signed letter accompanied with the grading and/or Conditions of Approval 9 building plans to verify that the plans incorporate the geotechnical recommendations aimed for minimizing expansive soils effects and fill settlement on structures. (MM-Geology) The developer shall hire a certified geotechnical engineer to observe construction to assure compliance with recommendations in the approved geotechnical report. A copy of the contract and schedule of the certified geotechnical engineer shall be provided to the Community Development Department prior to the clearance of grading and building permits. (MM.- Geology) 20. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit the applicant shall submit a site plan prepared by a qualified biologist, that is to accompany all grading plans, that accurately identifies all jurisdictional wetland areas and the areas located outside of the immediate grading footprint shall be avoided during construction and no fill is allowed within these areas. Exclusion fencing shall be erected at the boundary of the wetlands and the active project area to limit access of heavy equipment and expansion of the construction area. Access 21. Direct access to the project site from Willow Road is not approved with this . permit. The applicant will be required to file for an amendment to the land use permit for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator prior to implementation of an alternative entrance to the site. Unless, the applicant can demonstrate that Willow Road contains a right of way width greater than fifty-five feet. Flood Hazard 22. This project is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as designated on the Federal Emergency Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2000-33) as they pertain to future construction of any structures on this property. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Floodplain Representative prior to the i clearance of any construction permits. Fire Protection District 23. Prior to the approval of permits, the applicant is required to demonstrate that all of the proposed development complies with the rules and regulations of the East Contra Costa County Fire District. Conditions of Approval 10 Debris Recovery 24. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit a "Debris Recovery Plan" demonstrating how they intend to recycle, reuse, or salvage building materials and other debris generated from the demolition of existing buildings and/or the construction of new buildings. Contact Lorna Brown, Resource Recovery Specialist 925-335-1231 or go to http•//www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/depart/ed/recycle/c-n-d/packgt.pdf for further information. 25. Prior to final inspection by the Building Inspection Dept., the developer shall submit a completed "Debris Recovery.Project" documenting actual debris recovery efforts (including quantities of recovered and land filled materials) that occurred throughout the project's duration. Air Quality 26. Prior to the issuance of grading permits or building permits and ongoing throughout the project the applicant shall provide that the "Basic Measures" and "Enhanced Measures" listed below be incorporated into the construction plans and implemented for the proposed project. The "Optional Measures" listed (also listed below) shall be incorporated if further emission reductions are deemed necessary by the County. To ensure compliance, the Applicant shall submit the construction plans for the review and approval of the zoning administrator prior to issuance of grading or building permits with the following criteria included as part of the "Notes" on the plans: Basic Measures: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Enhanced Measures: • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). 0 Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. Conditions of Approval 41 • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Optional Measures: • Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site. • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 25 mph. • Limit the area subject to excavation, grading and other construction activity at any one time. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, pre-construction surveys of all potential nesting raptor habitat shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within the project area and within 250 feet of the proposed area of disturbance, to the extent feasible based on access. Pre-construction surveys must be completed no more than 30 days before construction activities. Presence or sign of nesting raptors and all potentially occupied nest shall be recorded and monitored according to CDFG and California Consortium guidelines (CBOC, 1993, 1994). A monitoring report shall be submitted to CDFG no later than two weeks before initiation of grading. Hydrology and Water Quality. J 28. Erosion Control Measures shall be implemented on all areas during the rainy season, from October 15-April 15. The measures shall be operable prior to October 1 of any year grading operations have left areas unprotected from erosion. (MM-Hydrology and Water Quality) The applicant shall provide evidence that the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan contains appropriate Best Management Practices to reduce erosion and. water quality impacts. Erosion control measures shall also be reflected in the grading plans and construction documents for the project. The Best Management Practices should include, but not be limited to the following measures: • Protect stormwater inlets by using a double row of straw bales to absorb sediment and pollutants. Protect the stormwater inlets from vehicular damage; • Install sediment traps in catch basins and drain inlets, or create an overflow drain by raising the inlet so hat sediments will settle before reaching the drain; • Prevent spills and leaks from construction vehicles and equipment; • Clean up spills immediately when they happen, using dry cleanup methods whenever possible, and if water must be used, use just enough to keep the dust down; • Store materials under cover; Conditions of Approval . 12 • Cover and maintain dumpsters; • Clean up paints and solvents, adhesives, and cleaning solutions properly; • Keep fresh concrete and cement mortars out of gutters, storm drains, and streams; e Service and maintain portable toilets; • Dispose of cleared vegetation properly; • Make sure all demolition waste is properly disposed of; • Plan pavement construction to avoid stormwater pollution including: Apply asphalt and seal coat during dry weather; cover catchbasins and manholes when applying seal coat; aiid always park pavers over drip pans or absorbent material. 29. The applicant shall ensure that operations under the permit that are within five hundred feet of residential or commercial occupancies, except as. otherwise provided by conditions of approval for the project, shall be limited to weekdays and to the hours, between seven-thirty a.m. and five p.m., except that maintenance.and service work on equipment may be performed at any time. Construction 30. Construction Period Development Activity Restrictions — Contractor and/or developer shall comply with the following construction noise, dust, litter, and traffic control requirements: A. 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: New Year's Day (State and Federal) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (State and Federal) Washington's Birthday/Presidents' Day (State and Federal) Lincoln's Birthday (State) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day(State and Federal)' Independence Day(State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day(State and Federal) Veterans Day(State.and Federal) Thanksgiving Day(State and Federal) Day after Thanksgiving (State) Christmas Day(State and Federal) Conditions of Approval 13 For specific details on the actual day the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal Holidays http://www.opm.gbv/fedhol/2006.asp California Holidays http://www.edd.ca.gov/eddstliol.htm B. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers that are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-generation equipment such as air compressors and. concrete pumpers as far away from existing residences as possible. C. The applicant shall make a good-faith effort to avoid interference with existing neighborhood traffic flows. D. Transporting of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and is prohibited on state and federal holidays. E. The site shall be maintained in .an .orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. F. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post at the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site, notice that construction work will commence. The notice shall include a list of contact persons with, name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for maintaining the list shall also be included. The list shall be kept current at all times and shall consist of persons with authority to indicate and implement corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of individuals responsible for noise and litter control, tree protection, construction traffic and vehicles and the 24-hour emergency number shall be expressly identified on the notice. A copy of the notice shall be concurrently transmitted to the Community Development Department. The notice shall be accompanied by a list of the names and addresses of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area noticed. G. Prior to approval of the final map or issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide a letter to the Community Development Department indicating that he/she has fully disclosed these requirements to 911 contractors and subcontractors within this project. Conditions of Approval 14 PUBLIC WORKS RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR LAND USE PERMIT 05-2026 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the County Ordinance Code. Any exceptions must be stipulated in these conditions of approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the Revised Site Plan submitted to the Community Development Department on February 7, 2006 and Stormwater Control.Plan received on May 4, 2006. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT OR INITIATION OF THE USE PROPOSED UNDER THIS PERMIT. General Requirements: 31. Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted, if necessary, to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and security for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code for the conditions of approval of this permit. Any necessary traffic signage and striping shall be included in the improvement plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. Roadway Improvements (Sugar Barge Road): 32. Applicant shall construct pavement widening to provide a 20-foot hal-f width, longitudinal and transverse drainage, necessary street lighting, and temporary conforms for paving and drainage along the project frontage of Sugar Barge Road. Exception Applicant is granted an exception from installation of frontage improvements along Sugar Barge Road, provided that a Deferred Improvement Agreement is executed for the following improvements: J. Construction of pavement widening and transitions to provide a 20 foot half-width, longitudinal and transverse drainage, necessary street lighting, and temporary conforms for paving and drainage along the project frontage of Sugar Barge; and, 2. At the time the Deferred Improvement Agreement is called up, the property owner shall submit improvement plans, prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to Public Works, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and security for all required improvements. These plans shall include any necessary Conditions of Approval 15 -traffic signage and striping plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division. 33. Applicant shall locate new gates, if any are proposed, a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of pavement to allow vehicles to queue without obstructing through traffic along Sugar Barge Road. 34. - Applicant shall pave the first 50 feet of each driveway entrance shown on the revised site plan to prevent dust and gravel from spilling onto Sugar Barge Road. Access to Adjoining Property Proof of Access 35. 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 36. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the County's Application and Permit Center, if necessary, for construction of any improvements within the right of way of Willow.Road. Sight Access 37. _ Applicant shall only be permitted access at the locations of the driveways shown on,the revised site plan. Road Dedications: 38. Applicant shall convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, 60 feet of right of way necessary for the future planned width of 60 feet along the project frontage of Sugar Barge Road. Applicant shall convey to�the County, by Offer of Dedication, additional right of way to accommodate a smooth curve (offset 30 feet from the existing centerline of,the road) at the angle point located approximately 343 feet north of the southeastern corner of the subject property, along the frontage of Willow Road. Sight Distance: 39. Applicant: shall provide sight distance at the proposed access points (private driveways) ,with Sugar Barge Road for a design speed of 35 miles per hour. Conditions of Approval 16 The applicant shall inrri vegetation, -as necessary, to provide sight distance at these intersections, and any new signage, landscaping, fencing, retaining walls, or other obstructions proposed at these access points shall be setback to ensure that the sight line is clear of any obstructions. Utilities/Undergrounding: 40. Any new utility distribution facilities shall be installed underground. Maintenance of Facilities: 41. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) plan describing the long-term maintenance practices and responsibilities with respect to the proposed stormwater mechanical devices, subject to the review of the Public Works Department. Drainage Improvements: Collect and Convey 42. Applicant shall collect and convey all storm water entering and/or originating on this:property without diversion and within an adequate storm -drainage facility, to an adequate natural watercourse having a definable bed and banks, or to an existing adequate public storm drainage system which conveys the storm waters to an adequate natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. 43. Applicant shall be permitted to collect and convey storm waters to a drainage facility maintained by an Irrigation District provided that the applicant provides: - Written substantiation that the Irrigation District accepts the storm water in perpetuity. - Written substantiation that the Irrigation District owns fee title to the drainage facility from the point of discharge to the natural watercourse. - Substantiation that the Irrigation District facility is adequately sized to accommodate the design storm plus the Irrigation District flows. The design flow shall be based on ultimate development anticipated in the area. - Adequate capacity analysis, which considers the presence of low spots in any District canal, which may reduce the system's capacity. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 44. Applicant shall design and construct all storm drainage facilities in compliance with the County Ordinance Code and Public Works Design Standards. Conditions of Approval 17 Pedestrian Facilities: 45. The applicant shall design all .public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (Handicap Access) and the Americans with Disability Act. This shall include any walkways or paths constructed with this permit. . Provision "CS' of the NPDES Permit: 46. 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 part of these requirements, the applicant shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to the maximum extent practicable into the design of this project, implement them and provide for perpetual operation and maintenance for all -treatment BMPs. 47. A Stormwater Control Plan received on May 4, 2006 by the Public Works Department was reviewed and determined to be preliminarily complete. Although the Stormwater Control Plan has been determined to be preliminarily complete, it is subject to revision during the preparation of improvement plans, as necessary to bring it into full compliance with C.3 stormwater requirements. The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department a final approved Stormwater Control Plan that has been certified and stamped by a licensed, professional Civil Engineer, Architect, or Landscape Architect. 48. 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." 49. Any water quality features that are designed to retain water for longer then 72 hours shall be subject to the review of the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. 50. The applicant shall provide a Stormwater Control Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan for the review of the Public Works Department, and record of an Operation. and Maintenance Agreement, including any necessary rights-of- entry, prior to issuance of a building permit. Conditions of Approval '1$'' 51. The applicant shall annex into any financing mechanisms (e.g. Community Facilities District) formed to ensure 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. A. Prior to approval, the final Stormwater Control Plan shall adequately demonstrate that the "non-traditional" Stormwater Management BMP features (such as CDS units,natural swales, etc.) proposed in the preliminary Stormwater Control Plan shall be shown to provide a degree of stormwater treatment compliant with the NPDES permit and/or equivalent to the degree of treatment provided by traditional BMPs designed and sized in accordance with the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. B. The final Stormwater Control Plan shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Health Services Department (Environmental Health Division) or other appropriate regulatory agency, that this development will not significantly impact water quality in nearby drinking wells. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan: 52. Prior to ground disturbance, the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to mitigate construction related impacts and submit it to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP shall be kept on-site at all times and shall be amended whenever there is a change in construction or operations which may affect the discharge of significant quantities of pollutants to surface waters, ground waters, or a municipal separate storm sewer system. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 53. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) for municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay -Region II or Central Valley Region-Region IV). Compliance shall include developing long-term best management practices (BMP's) for the reduction or elimination of storm water pollutants. The project design shall incorporate, wherever feasible, the following long-term BMP's in accordance with the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program for the site's storm water drainage: Conditions of Approval .1 91 - Trash bins shall be sealed to prevent leakage, OR, shall be located - within a covered enclosure. Stencil advisory warnings ("No Dumping, Drains to Delta") using thermoplastic tape. Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Shallow roadside and on-site swales. Distribute public information items regarding the Clean Water Program to users of the site. Develop a perpetual maintenance program for on-site clean water/drainage facilities. Other alternatives comparable to the above as approved by the Public Works Department. ADVISORY NOTES THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION .DOES NOT CONSTITUTE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. IT IS PROVIDED TO ALERT THE APPLICANT TO LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES TO WHICH THIS PROJECT MAY BE SUBJECT. A. NOTICE OF 90-DAY OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS,'OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. This notice is intended to advise the applicant that pursuant to Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations, and/or exactions required as part of this project approval. The opportunity to protest is limited to a 90-day period after the project is approved. The ninety (90) day period in which you may protest the amount of any fee or the imposition of any dedication, reservation, or other exaction required by this approved permit, begins on the date this permit was approved. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 and delivered to the Community Development Department within 90 days of the approval date of this permit. B. 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 Conditions of Approval 26, 'may also be required. This may significantly increase the time and' applicant's costs associated with approval of the application. C. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Game. It is the applicant's responsibility to. notify the Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Game Code. D. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps.of Engineers. It is the applicant's responsibility. to. notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to determine if a permit is required, and if it can be obtained. E. Comply with the Bridge/Thoroughfare'Fee Ordinance requirements for the Bethel Island Area of Benefit and ECCRFFA (RTDIM) Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. These fees must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. F. The subject property is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as designated on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The applicant should be aware of the requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2000-33) as they pertain to future construction of any structures on this property. G. Portions of this project are located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as designated on the Federal Emergency Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The applicant should be aware of the requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2000-33) as they pertain to future construction of any structures on this property. H. Comply with the requirements of the Ironhouse Sanitary District. I. Comply with the requirements of the East County Fire Protection District.. J. Comply with the requirements of the County Office of the Sheriff.' K. Comply with the requirements of the Building Inspection Department. Permits are required prior to grading and construction. lcc 10/06/06 G:\Current Planning\curr-plan\Staff Reports\LP05-2026 per ECRPC 9-8-2008 App.coa.doc Rev. 10-9-2008 -rd EXHIBIT. 4 CEQA Determination • Mitigated Negative Declaration • Initial Study • Mitigation Monitoring Program ,�wCdn m u n ityr Contra • Dennis M.Barry,AICP Development Community Development Director Department COSta County County Administration Building 651 Pine Street � .sE--` of K AUQ3 --2 AN' 10. 08 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553-0095 Phone: (925) 335-1210 :c ti;4° DATE: April 19, 2001 Sr9 COON REVISED NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION County File #LP052O26 Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the"Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"as amended to date,this is to advise you that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: David Riggs (Applicant & Owner), County File #LP052026: The applicant requests approval to amend an existing land use permit, to expand a marina (Sugar Barge Resort) by constructing 19 metal buildings for dry boat storage and recreational vehicles with parking on a 38-acre site. In addition,the proposal includes a General Plan Amendment, County File#GP040001,that changes the General Plan designations from SL (Single Family Low Density) to CR (Commercial Recreational). The subject property is located west of Willow.Road and east of Piper Road at 1440 Sugar Barge Road in the unincorporated Bethel Island area. (Zoning:A-2)(Atlas Page:E-28)(APN: 030-110-006) The proposed development will not result in any significant impacts. A copy of the mitigated negative declaration and all documents referenced in the mitigated negative declaration may be reviewed in the offices of the Community Development Department, and Application and Permit Center at the McBrien Administration Building,North Wing,Second Floor, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, during normal business hours. Public Comment Period-The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to 5:00 P.M.,July 27,2006. Any comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address: Lashun Cross a !� Community Development Department Contra Costa County r 651 Pine Street, North Wing, 4th Floor JUN 2 6 2006 Martinez, CA 94553 S.L. !HEIR, C0UiNT`r C I- RK BY coN COST COUP)- DEP -1Y Office Hours Monday- Friday:8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd & 5th Fridays of each month Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: LP052026 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,NW, 2nd Floor 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Lashun Cross(925)335-1229 4. Project Location: Sugar Barge Marina and Resort 1440 Sugar Barge Road Willow Road& Sugar Barge Rd Bethel Island, CA 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: David Riggs Riggs Enterprise P.O. Box 1440 Bethel Island, CA 94511 6. General Plan Designation: Existing SL(Single Family Residential-Low density) Proposed General Plan: CR(Commercial Recreational) . 7. Zoning: (A-2)General Agricultural District with a minimum of 5 acres. 8. Description of Project: David Riggs(Applicant&Owner) County File#LP052026: The applicant requests approval to amend an existing land use permit, to expand a marina (Sugar Barge Resort)by constructing 19 metal buildings for dry boat storage and recreational vehicles with parking on a 38 acre site. In addition,the proposal includesa General Plan Amendment, County File#GP040001 that changes the General Plan designation from SL(Single Family Low Density) to CR(Commercial Recreational). The subject property is located west of Willow Road and east of Piper Road at 1440 Sugar Barge Rd. in the unincorporated Bethel Island area. (Zoning: A-2) (Atlas Page: E-28) (A-PN: 030-110-006). 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The surrounding environment is a resort like setting open to the public for recreational purposes such as RV parking, campsites, a boat launch facility and restaurant,picnic areas, boat berths, and a recreational room with a pool. Along Willow Road, adjacent to the site are a few residential homes in an agricultural surrounding. 10. Other public agencies whose approval California Department of Fish and Game; is required (e.g.permits, financing, Army Corps of Engineers; approval, or participation agreement): Public Works Department; Building Inspection Department. I' 2 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. X` Land Use:and Planning _ Transportation/ _ Public Services Population &Housing Circulation _ Utilities & Service X Geological Problems X Biological Resources Systems X Water Energy & Mineral _ Aesthetics Air Quality Resources X Cultural Resources Mandatory Findings of _ Hazards Recreation Significance X Noise DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be! a significant' effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added'to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a signifcant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRON74ENTAL 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 EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. -15- 6 LASHUN CROSS Date Project Planner Contra Costa County Community Development Department 3 SOURCES In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation, the following references (which are available for review at Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street 5th Floor-North Wing, Martinez) were consulted: 1. Contra Costa General Plan 2005 -2020 (January 2005) 2. Zoning Ordinance 3. General Plan and Zoning Maps 4. Project Description and Site Plan 5. Cortese Hazardous Materials List, April 1998 6. Contra Costa County Important Farmland Map 2000 (Department of Conservation) 7. Site visit 8. Agency Comments/Bay Area Quality Management District 9. Field Review 10. Geotechnical Report prepared by Terrasearch Inc, February 2000 11. Archaeological Report prepared by LSA, November 2000 12. Biological Report prepared by LSA, October 2000 13. Wetlands Delineation Report prepared (LSA, July 22, 1998) 14. Williamson Act Contracts .15. Contra Costa County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2000 16. Contra Costa County Public Works Flood Rate Map 17. Erosion Control Plan 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I. AESTHETICS —Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Sources:1, 3,4) X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?(Sources:l, 3, 4) X c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality,of the site and its surroundings?(Sources l,3,4) X d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Sources:1, 3,4, 7) x SUMMARY : The proposed project is to expand an existing marina and resort facility by adding 19 prefabricated metal buildings for dry boat storage. Fifteen of the buildings will be 60 ft. by 160 ft. and four will be 60 ft. by 116.5 ft. with a maximum height of 16 feet. The construction and placement of 19 buildings will alter the visual characters of"the site and its surrounding, however, this would be a less than significant impact as no residential dwellings are located in close proximate to the 38 acre site and this area is not classified as a scenic vista. No trees or historic buildings are located on the parcel. Nighttime lighting and possible glares would be associated with the metal buildings but would not be a significant impact as the storage buildings would be consistent with the use already established for the resort. 5 H. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES—In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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? (Source:4, 6) X b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? (Sources: 2, 4, 14) 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: 2, 4) X SUMMARY The expansion of the Sugar Barge Marina and Resort onto a 38 acre site will not convert prune farmland. The property is not within a Williamson Act contract. The property is zoned A-2 General Agriculture, however, Section 84-38.404 of County Code Title 8 specifies with the granting of a land use permit, the zoning designation allows boat storage areas within one mile by public road of a boat launching facility open to the public. 6 III. AIR QUALITY — Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Sources: 4, 8) X b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Sources: 4, 8) 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, 19, 20) X d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Sources: 4, 8). X e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Sources: 4, 8) X SUMMARY : An Ozone Maintenance Plan was prepared in 1995 as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition, the U.S. EPA approved a Carbon Monoxide Plan. The San Francisco Air Basin is currently designated as an "attainment" area for carbon monoxide(CO), sulfur dioxide(SO2),nitrogen dioxide(NOZ) and is designated as "non-attainment" for federal ozone(O3) and particulate matte:r(PM-10). As a result of the project proposal, the construction of 19 prefabricated buildings would result in less than significant impact. The project would be conditioned for temporary construction equipment that possibly would result in exhaust emissions and particulate matter in the form 7 of dust. The project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people as the facility will be used for storage, however temporary odors may be experienced during the construction phase. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S* Fish and Wildlife Service?(Sources: ) 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&Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Sources: 4,12) 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: 4,12,13) 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: 4,12) X e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Sources: 4,12) 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: 4,12) X 8 SUMMARY: SENSITIVE HABITATS Wetlands Impact A formal delineation of wetlands and other waters of the United States on the property was conducted by LSA on June and July of 1997. The results of the delineation are described in a report entitled Delineation of Areas Potentially Subject to Clean Water Act Jurisdiction on the Sugar Barge Property, Bethel Island, California, prepared by LSA, dated July 22, 1998. Based on a site verification visit with the Corps, the delineation was revised to include a total of 15.30 acres of wetlands and other waters of the United States. The extent of Corps jurisdiction on the property was confirmed in a letter to LSA, dated May 3, 2000. Any work affecting jurisdictional wetlands or other waters of the United States will likely require authorization from the Corps, RWQCB and CDFG. Although the proposed project has been designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional areas to the maximum extent practicable,the project will avoid 95% (14.62 acres) of existing wetlands and other waters of the United States on the project site. A total of.68 acres of wetlands will be permanently filled as a result of project development. The jurisdictional areas to be filled include two low-value, disjunct seasonal wetlands within the upland portion of the site. MITIGATION MEASURES Wetland impacts will be mitigated off-site by creating new seasonal wetlands at a ratio of 1:1 (created: filled) at the approved Elsie Mitigation Bank. At least 30 days prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit,the developer shall provide a copy of the individual permit authorization from the Army Corps and a copy of the permit application and supporting documentation such as the wetland mitigation plan and 404 (b) (1) alternative analysis. In addition, the applicant shall provide a copy of the Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board-Central Valley Office)pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. All documents shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. SPECIAL-STATUS PLANTS No special-status plant species were detected on or in the vicinity of the property during the site visit. Total of eight special-status plants are considered potentially present in the project vicinity. The eight special plants is a subset of a larger list of regionally-occurring special-status plants that require habitat conditions not present on the site (e.g., serpentine soils, tidal action, etc.). Overall,the potential for occurrence of special-status plants on the property is low due to lack of suitable habitat, historic disturbance (i.e.past agricultural activities); and the dominance of non-native species throughout the site. SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE(Potential Impacts on Biological Resources) A total of five raptor species were observed during a site visit during LSA's site visit. These raptors included red-tailed hawk,red-shouldered hawk, American kestrel, white-tailed kite, and northern harrier. Two of these raptors, white-tailed kite and northern harrier are California Species of Special Concern. A single white-tailed kite was seen over the southern portion of the property. In addition,male and female 9 harriers were seen searching for food together over the north-central portions of the site in the vicinity of the seasonal wetlands. Based on the time of the year and observed behavior,these two individuals may constitute a breeding pair. Although no nests were observed during the site visit, the willow woodland could potentially support the following nesting raptor species that are California Species of Special Concern: white-tailed kite, Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, long-eared owl, and Swainson's hawk. In addition, the seasonal wetlands in the northern and western portions of the site provide suitable nesting habitat for northern harriers, which usually nest in existing wetlands, but may also nest in grasslands and agricultural fields several miles from water. Therefore, the pair of northern harriers observed during the site visit could potentially nest on the property, although suitable habitat is also present in the surrounding pasture lands and seasonal wetlands. The Swainson's hawk, a state-listed threatened species, could also potentially occur on the property. This migratory species nests in scattered locations in the Central Valley and Delta regions. The closest known nesting record is from the northern end of Medford Island, approximately six miles to the east. Another Swainson's hawk nest has been reported along the south side of Sand Creek near Brentwood, approximately nine miles to the southwest. In addition, a pair of Swainson's hawks were observed by LSA biologists in May of 2002, during field surveys of another project site on Bethel Island located approximately 1.5 miles to the west of the Sugar Barge property. Although these birds were not confirmed nesting on this site, LSA determined that they were using the site regularly and were likely nesting in the nearby vicinity. Another potentially occurring species is the salt marsh common yellowthroat, a California Species of Special Concern, which nests in riparian woodland and freshwater marsh and winters in areas of brackish marsh and salt marsh. Suitable habitat for this species on the property is limited and there are no nesting records for this species in the area. The drainage ditch on the western and northern boundaries of the property provides marginal habitat for the western pond turtle, which has been recorded from the project vicinity. However,the potential for pond turtle occurrence is limited due to the extensive disturbance associated with past agricultural use of the property and adjacent lands, small size of the drainage ditch, shallow depth of water, and general lack of protective cover. Populations of the giant garter snake occur in the Central Valley and San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta region. However,this species is considered very rare in the Bethel Island area of the Delta. There are giant garter snake records listed in the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), within several miles of the project site. The potential for this species to occur on-site is low due to limited suitable habitat, disturbance from historic agricultural activities on the property, and the lack of a suitable year- round water source. MITIGATION MEASURES Pre-construction surveys of all potential raptor nesting habitat within 500 feet of the project site shall occur within 30 days of ground disturbing activities/project construction. If occupied raptor nests are found within 250 feet of the proposed construction area, a protection zone shall be established around the nest with orange construction fencing and/or staking that shall remain until the juveniles have fledged and are independent of the nest. The width of raptor nest protection zones will be variable and established 10 based on site specific conditions such as the individual raptors/species tolerance to activity and screening vegetation or topography. The protection zones will be established by a qualified wildlife biologist in consultation with.the California Department of Fish and Game. No construction or earth moving activity shall occur within the designated buffer until it is determined that the species have fledged or attain sufficient skills to avoid project zones. A pre-construction survey for western pond turtle and giant garter snake shall be conducted by a qualified biologist not more than 48 hours in advance of ground disturbing activities/project construction. All suitable habitat On and immediately adjacent(within 100 feet)to the project site shall be surveyed. If evidence of either species is found, the appropriate State and Federal agencies shall be contacted prior to commencement of any construction on site. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES —Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Cause a substantial adverse change:in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 (Source: 4,11) X Cause a substantial adverse b. change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.59 (Source: 4,11) X c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique,paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? (Source: 4,11) X d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Source: 4,11) x SUMMARY: STUDY AREA LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTION The study area is located at the eastern end of Bethel Island. Bethel Island is a low-lying island in northeastern Contra Costa County, in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta system. The study area is generally level, marshy ground with scattered sand mounds. The southern two-thirds of the study area is a low mound but generally level, while the northern third of the study area is marshy. Much of the island has shallow groundwater levels, and the study area is partially 11 drained by a long ditch on the west side of the parcel. The soils in the study area have been mapped as Piper fine sandy loam and Shima muck. The dominant soil in the study area is Piper find sandy loam. Tule marsh is composed of tall, dense plant communities, occasionally interrupted by open water. Although this was the dominant native plant community before the . draining of Bethel Island, today the majority of the study area is dominated by non-native grasses. The study area is currently vacant and is not in use. METHODS Record Search and Literature Review Research was conducted to determine if cultural resources are recorded within the study area and to assess the study area's potential to contain unrecorded resources. This assessment was based on archaeological, ethnographic, and historical documents and the location, distribution, and environmental setting of nearby known cultural resources. A records search (#01-1365) at the Northwestern Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University,was done on March 6, 2002. The Northwest Information Center is an affiliate of the California Office of Historic Preservation and'is the official state repository of cultural resources reports and records for 16 northern California counties, including Contra Costa County. The record search indicated that the study area had not been.studied before and contains no recorded cultural resources. Several recorded cultural resources were identified within a half mile of the study area. Record search results are discussed below in more detail in the Study Results section below. LSA reviewed cultural resources inventories including the California Department of Parks and Recreation's California Inventory of Historic Resources (1976) and the Office of Historic Preservation's Five Views:An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California (1988), California Historical Landmarks (1990), California Points of Historical Interest (1992), and the Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File (2002). The Directory of Properties includes the listings of the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, California Historical Landmarks and California Points of Historical Interest. The Contra Costa County Preliminary Historic Resources Invento7y and Revised Preliminary Historic Resources Inventory were also reviewed (Contra Costa County Community Development Department 1989, Contra Costa Planning Department 1976). No cultural resources within or adjacent to the study area are listed in these inventories. Environmental, historical, archaeological, and ethnographic information was reviewed to establish the project area's cultural and environmental setting. Materials examined include "Burials in Sand Mounds of the Delta Region of the Sacramento— San Joaquin River System" (Cook and Elsasser 1956), "Eastern Miwok" (Levy 1978), Handbook of the Indians of California (Kroeber 1925), the chapter on Eastern Miwok peoples in the Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8: California (Levy 1978), Volume 4 of the California Archaeological Invesntory Prehistoric Overview (Stewart 1982), California Archaeology (Moratto 1984), the Contra Costa County soil servey (Welch 1977), a map of natural vegetation communities (Kachler 1977),the Geologic Map of the Sacramento Quadrangle (Wagner 1981), 12 Historic Spots in California (Hoover et al. 1990), and Califonria Place Name (Gudde 1998). LSA reviewed topographic maps to determine the study area's historical topography and environmental conditions (United States Geological Survey 1910, 1952a, 1952b, 1977). The results of this literature review are described below. Native American Consultation On March 11, 2002, LSA requested that the California Native American Heritage Commission review its sacred lands file to determine if the file indicated the presence of Native American cultural resources in the study area and provide a list of Native American cultural resources in the study area and provide a list of Native American cultural resources in the study area and provide a list of Native American individuals and organizations who might have knowledge of cultural resources in the study area. Debbie Pilas-Treadway, Environmental Specialist III, responded in a fax dated March 19, 2002 that there were no resources listed in the sacred lanes file within the study area. She also provided a list of Native American contacts. Field Survey A pedestrian field survey of the project area was conducted by LSA archaeologist Sara Palmer on April 25, 2002. The majority of the project area was walked in approximately 20-meterwide- zig-zag transects. Access to the northern part of the project area was prevented by a slough and dense vegetation. Much of the adjacent northeastern part of the project area was very boggy and partially underwater, and therefore was not accessible. The remainder of the project area was very densely vegetated with grasses and forbs roughly three to four feet high. Ground visibility was less than 5%. A trowel was used periodically to remove vegetation and expose underlying soils to view possible archaeological deposits. No animal backdirt could be located for review within the study area because of the dense vegetation cover. STUDY RESULT'S Impacts No cultural resources were identified within the study area as a result of background research of field survey. However, the pedestrian survey was inconclusive due to the area's dense vegetation. The survey did confirm the presence of Piper sand deposits throughout the study area (Welch 1977). These soil deposits are highly sensitive archaeologically because they often contain Native American burials. In their discussion of archaeological sites recorded early in the twentieth century by the University of California Archaeological Survey, archaeologists S.F. Cook and A.B. Elasser write that " These [archaeological] sites, despite wide divergence in individual character, possess one feature in common: they are all located in or on small mound- like soil bodies which consist primarily of compacted sand which ... may be attributed to the formation known as Piper find sandy loam" (Cook and Elasasser 1956:26). Additional archaeological sites, many containing human remains, have been found in these deposits through the western Delta, recently at Oakley and the Holland Tract (Galvan2002). Because Cook and Elsasser associate archaeological sites in the Delta with mounded areas, LSA reviewed historical topographic maps from 1910 and 1952 and the current 7.5 minute 13 topographic map, printed in 1977, to determine if the study area contains any mounded areas. These maps indicate that the topography of the eastern end of Bethel Island has changed noticeably over the past hundred years, presumably as a result of land reclamation efforts, filling and soil subsidence. It is not possible to determine conclusively whether the study area contained mounded areas of Piper sandy soils in the past. Mitigation Measures Piper sandy soils are highly sensitive for cultural resources. Given the potential that the Piper sandy soils within the project area contain Native American burials, a qualified archaeologist should monitor all ground-disturbing activities within the project area until final grade has been achieved, or at such time the monitor concludes that monitoring is no longer necessary. Ground-disturbing activities may include, but are not limited to excavation, auguring, grading, dredging, clearing, grubbing, and stump removal. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits the developer shall provide for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator a copy of the contract for the hired certified archaeologist to be present during construction activities, such as grading. Given the potential that the Piper sandy soils within the project area contain Native American burials, it would be appropriate for a Native American monitor to be present. If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, the on-site archaeological monitor should be contacted immediately. All work within 50 feet of the discovery should be redirected until the archaeological monitor can examine the finds and make recommendations. Prehistoric materials can include flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, choppers) or obsidian, chert, or quartzite tool, making debris; midden (i.e., culturally darkened soil often containing heat affected rock, ash and charcoal, shellfish remains, and cultural materials); and stone milling equipment (e.g. mortars,pestles, hand-stones). Historical materials may include wood, stone, concrete, or adobe footings, walls and other structural remains, debris-filled wells or privies; and deposits of wood, metal, glass, ceramics, and other refuse. If archaeological deposits are identified, it is recommended that such deposits be avoided by project activities. If the deposits cannot be avoided, they should be evaluated to determine whether they are eligible for listing, adverse effects to it will need to be avoided or mitigated. Encountering Human Remains Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroner's authority. If human remains are encountered, the on-site archaeological 14 monitor should be notified immediately. Work should halt within 50 feet of the find and the County Coroner should be notified. If the human remains are of North American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours Of this identification. Pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code, the Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Native American Most Likely Descendent to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS— Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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. (Source: 4, 8, 10) X 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? (Source: 4, 8, 10) X 3. Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction?(Source:4, 8, 10) X 4. Landslides?(Sources: 4, 8, 10) X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?(Source: 4, 8, 10) 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: 4, 8, 10) 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? (Source: 4, 8, 10) 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 X 15 wastewater?(Source: 4, 8, 10) SUMMARY: Discussion Al. The nearest fault considered active by the California Division of Mines &Geology is the Greenville fault. The Greenville fault A-P Zone passes approximately 15 miles southwest of the site. A2. According to the Safety Element(p.10-13)the site is in an area rated "highest damage susceptibility". The risk of structural damage from ground shaking is regulated by the building codes and County Grading Ordinance. The UBC requires use of seismic parameters which allow the structural engineering analysis for buildings to be based on soil profile types(see UBC., 1997,Volume 2,Div. 5,Page 2-23). The Terrasearch report provides UBC seismic parameters for the site. Compliance with building and grading regulations can be expected to keep risks within generally accepted limits. A3. According to the Safety Element(p. 10-15),the site is rated "generally high" Iiquefaction potential. The mapping of Helley&Graymer(1997)considers the site to be underlain by Late Pleistocene alluvium at depth, and the borehole logs are consistent with this interpretation. However, the upper 12-15 feet of soils on the site are loose sands and the water table is approximately 5 feet below the surface. These loose sands appear to be geologically recent deposits that overlie the well indurated dune sands of Late Pleistocene age. A4. a. With regard to landslides,no slides are shown on published maps, the Soil Survey of Contra Costa County (1977) indicates that the erosion hazard is low and the preliminary finding of Terrasearch report is that the site is suitable for dry boat storage b. A SWPPP and Erosion Control Plan are a routine requirement of projects that result in disturbance of 1 acre or more. The SWPPP identifies the"the best management practices"that are most appropriate for the site, and the"Erosion Control Plan,"which is required for the grading permit, provides the details of the erosion control measures to be applied on the site and maintained throughout the winter rainy season. C. Review of the existing geologic data indicates that the project is feasible. There is no landslide hazard. d. Expansive soils shrink and swell as a result of moisture changes that can cause heaving and cracking of slabs-on-grade,pavements and structures founded on shallow foundations. It should be recognized that expansive soils are an engineering issue, and not a land use or feasibility issue. Building damage due to volume changes associated with expansive soils can be reduced by placing slabs on select, granular fill;by use of rigid mat or post-tensioned slabs. In this case the three borings penetrated sandy soils (Piper sand) which are characterized by a low 16 expansion potential. However the central and northern portions of the site were not explored and these areas may be mantled by the Shima muck. Furthermore, soils in the vicinity are reported to be "highly corrosive". e. The project is expected to be served by existing wastewater facilities of the Sugar Barge Resort and Marina. IMPACTS &MITIGATIONS 1. Liquefaction Impact. Loose to medium dense sands up to 12-15 feet thick were penetrated in borings in the southern portions of the project area. There is no data on the thickness of sands in the central or northern portions of the area proposed for dry boat storage. Hence, the geometry of the sand body is not fully established by the borehole area. It may represent geologically recent channel sand, a longshore bar or a layer of sand that is considered in thickness and engineering properties across the entire site. There are two hazards posed by liquefaction: a) differential settlement,and b)ground failure. Miti ations. At least 30 days prior to requesting construction permits, submit an updated geotechnical report that a)provides an additional subsurface data to evaluate the geometry and thickness of the sand; b)provides an assessment of the liquefaction potential of the associated hazards, explaining details of the methodology/parameters/assumptions used in the analysis; c)provide practical measures to control/avoid damage from liquefaction; and d)provide testing protocols to confirm that adequate mitigation has been achieved(do not assume remediation is not feasible/not required) 2. Expansive and Corrosive Soils I p. The Soil Survey of Contra Costa County indicates that at least some potential building sites and roadways on the site are underlain by highly expansive soils, and some soils in the vicinity are know to be `very highly" corrosive. The Terrasearch report has provided preliminary recommendations for foundations. However that report.is 5 years old, did not explore all of the project area, and did provide assessment of expansion potential or corrosivity of soils. Further exploration, laboratory testing and engineering analysis is needed to confirm/refine the preliminary recommendations of Terrasearch. Mitigation. (A) Prior to issuance of building permits, chemical testing of representative building pad soils shall be submitted to determine the level of corrosion protection required for steel and concrete materials used for construction. The following measures shall be implemented where appropriate to protect against corrosion: use of sulfate-resistant concrete and use of protective linings to encase steel piping buried in native soils. (B) The geotechnical engineer shall a) review and approve grading, drainage and foundations plans prior to issuance of construction permits to verify that the plans incorporate the geotechnical recommendations aimed at minimizing expansive soils 17 effects and fill settlement on structures; and observe construction to assure compliance with recommendations in the approved geotechnical report. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? (Source: 4) 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? (Source: 4) 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? (Source: 4) X d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65862.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Source: 4,5) 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. (Source: 2,4,15) 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? (Source: 2,4,15) X g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source: 2,4,15,18) X h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild lands? (Source: ) X SUMMARY: Hazardous conditions resulting from construction and implementation of the dry storage expansion project could possibly be related to an explosion of the release of hazardous substances (including but not limited to 18 oil,pesticides, or chemicals) in the event of an accident or upset conditions as a result of mobile equipment. However,this is a temporary and less than significant impact, once constructed the access road would not involve the use of hazardous materials common to construction such as fuel and petroleum products. The use, clean up and disposal of potentially hazardous material will be managed according to standard procedures to protect air quality and water quality per state laws. The project is outside of the radius of a school and surrounded by recreational development and approximately 15.3 acres of wetland The Byron Airport is not within range of the project. The transporting of boats and other watercraft vehicles could emit hazardous materials however, this impact is less than significant and consistent with the existing use as well as by State regulations for boat safety and spill accidents. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Violate any wager quality standards or waste discharge requirements?(Source 7, 15) 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 silttion on- or off-site? (Sources: 24) 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? (Sources: 24) X 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, 24) X f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Sources: 7). 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: 7, 14) X 19 h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that 'would impede or redirect flood flows? (Sources: 7, 14) x 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: l) X j. Inundation by seiche,tsunami, or mudflow? (Sources: l) X SUMMARY: The SWPPP is based on current site conditions and anticipated conditions following proposed development as reflected on the.plans entitled, Grading &Drainage Plan and Erosion Control Plan, prepared by Alexander & Associates, Inc, dated December 15, 2004. REGULATORY BACKGROUND A SWPPP is required for construction projects under the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit Program, which is a component of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NUDES) program of the federal Clean Water-Act. The program is administrated by the State Water Resources Control Board, which has issued statewide general permit covering all construction activity in the state (Construction Activities Storm Water General Permit- Water Quality Order No. 99-08-DWQ [General Permit] for the purposes of regulating runoff from construction sites. Construction activities that involve disturbance of one or more acres of soil or activities that disturb less than one acre, but are part of a larger common plan of development that collectively disturb more than one acre, must obtain coverage under the General Permit. Erosion and sedimentation on the Sugar Barge Dry Storage Expansion project site may occur the Best Management Practices (BMP's) outline in the Storm Water Prevention Plan. The project site has relatively level terrain with some erosion hazard. For project development, cuts and fills will be balanced. Fill materials will be deposited in level areas and compacted to County approved engineering standards. The project area is currently drained by channelization drainages that extend along the western, northern, and eastern sides of the project site. These drainages are periodically maintained by the Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District (BIMID). Following site grading, stabilization of fill and installation of the storm drain system, all surface runoff from the site will be directed into the applicant's storm drain system. Surface runoff from the site will be directed .into the applicant's storm drain system, which will ultimately discharge into the channelized drainage on the western side of the site. This drainage channel is ultimately tributary to Piper Slough (water is pumped over/through the perimeter levee system of Bethel Island). BIMID is 20 responsible for the operation and maintenance of the storm drain channel system on Bethel Island. Anticipated discharge locations and drainage pattern across the project area are illustrated on the Grading & Drainage Plan and Erosion Control Plan within the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan prepared by LSA Associates on August 23, 2005. Pollutant Source and BMP Identification (Permit Section A.5.b and A.5.c.) The anticipated amount of storm water run-on is limited and not expected to significantly increase the overall runoff from the site. The project site is located in fairly level terrain and it receives input from very slightly sloped, mostly level adjacent areas. BMPs that will protect operation storm water inlets or receiving waters from contaminated discharges are included in the erosion control notes illustrated on the Erosion Control 'Plan prepared by LSA on August 23, 2005. During construction phase, several materials will be kept in stockpiles located within designated storage areas on the site. All storage areas will be located away from storm drain inlets. The storage areas are located in the overall construction storage/staging area for the project. Site Runoff Characteristics (Permit Section A.5.c (3)) The construction area is estimated to encompass 17.01 acres within the 38 acre project site. Post-construction., the developed area will likely have an estimated runoff coefficient of 0.7 to 0.85. At present, there are no impervious surfaces present with the project area. After construction, approximately 45 percent of the surface area will be impervious. At present, there are no impervious surfaces present with the project area. After construction, approximately 45 percent of the surface area will be impervious. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES The location of all control measures are shown on the Erosion.Control Plan in Attachment B. All erosion control measures will be implemented on all areas during the rainy season, from October 15 through April 15. The measures will be operable prior to October 1 of any year grading operations have left areas unprotected from erosion. Wind erosion is not expected to be a significant issue. The project site does not occur in an area with a windy climate. The soil stabilization measures implemented to prevent erosion by runoff will also prevent any wind erosion that might occur. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project: . 21 Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Physically divide an established community? (Sources:1,2,3,4) X b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or 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:1,2,3,4) X c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Sources:1,2,3,4) X SUMMARY: Development and expansion of the dry boat storage at Sugar Barge Marina and Resort would not physically divide an established community. The area is zoned A-2.General Agriculture that would allow with the review and approval of a land use permit the establishment of boat storage areas within one mile by public road of a boat launching facility open to the public. However, the current General Plan designation is Single Family Low Density (SL), which is inconsistent with the proposed expansion. As a result a request for a General Plan Amendment was filed to change from Single Family Residential (SL) to Commercial Residential (CR). The approval of this change would be consistent with the proposed activity, therefore, the land use permit is contingent on the approved General Plan Amendment. A condition of approval will be added to reflect this contingency. X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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?(Source:4,12,13) 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 X 22 land use plan? (Source:,4 12,13) SUMMARY: Due to the nature.of the project and vicinity,the proposal will not result in impacts to mineral resources that would be of value. XI. NOISE—Would the project result in: Potentially Potentially' Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact . Impact Unless Impact ' Mitigation Incorporated 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? (Source: 1, 9) X' b. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive ground borne vibration or ground bome noise levels? (Source: 9) X c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient- noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Source: 9) X d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise .levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Source: 1,4) X e: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a pian has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source:, 4;5) X f. For a project within the viciity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the,project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 4,15)' X 23 SUMMARY: Short term noise levels and ground vibrations would occur during construction; however standard measures that include restricting construction hours, traffic flow and heavy equipment usage will reduce the noise effects. -The high season holidays of the resort and boat facilities will expose the residents to a higher level of traffic flow and recreational activity but with the limited hours of operations and security gate, the exposure to higher noise level and traffic is controlled to a less than significant impact. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significan Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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)? (Source:2,3,4) X b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the, construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source:2,3,4) X c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source:2,3,4) X SUMMARY: The proposal is recreational in nature and will not displace substantial numbers of housing, although the project induces a temporary population growth it is insignificant as the activity is storage related for boats and equipment. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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 24 impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public , services? . (Sources: 1,2,4,8) 1. Fire Protection? X 2'. Police,Protection? X 3. Schools? X 4. Parks!' X 5. Other public facilities? X SUMMARY: The proposed project will be served by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District and County Sheriff Department.. Since the proposal is recreational in nature a park fee will not be administered. XIV. RECREATION Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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? (Source:4) 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? (Source:4) X SUMMARY; The project expansion is a recreational facility and does not impact regional or neighborhood parks such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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 X 25 increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? (Source:3,4,8) b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Source:3,4,8) 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? (Source: 3,4,8) X d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (Source:3,4,8) X e. Result in inadequate emergency access? (Source: 3,4,8) X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Source:3,4,8) X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus.turnouts,bicycle racks)? (Source:3,4,8) X SUMMARY: The peak period of operation for the facility is generally between March and September. Staff is expected to be present to assist with parking. The expansion as proposed provides for additional parking spaces. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the Fire District will review the plans to ensure that adequate standards are met for emergency_purposed, therefore, suggesting an insignificant impact. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS_Would the project: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant. Significant Impact Impact, Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Sources: 4,8) 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: 4,8) X 26 c. Require or:result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environ-mental effects? (Sources: 4,8)' X d. Have sufficient water supplies available serve the project from existing entitlements -and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (Sources:4,8) 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:4,8) X f.. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's waste disposal needs? (Sources: 4,8) X g. Comply with federal; state and local statutes_and regulations related to solid waste? (Sources:4,8) X j SUMMARY: The proposal dry storage expansion is served by various public•agencies such as the Ironhouse Sanitary, Bethel.Island Municipal Improvement District. The project according to agency comment will not result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations for utilities. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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 27 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 project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment with significant impacts on biological resources (See#IV Biological and (See VI Geological resources) or eliminate a major period of California history or prehistory (See # IV Cultural), however with . incorporation of mitigation measures the project have the potential for a less than significant impact. No impacts that are cumulatively considerable because of the proposed project compliance with the identified conditions of approval imposed with mitigation measures ensure a less than significant impact of the environment. G:Current Planning\curr-plan\Env Review\Initial Studies\LP052026-InitialStudy.doc [vmb 11-7-05](hl 02-09-06) r n N U G U c G E E E w a> > ° > ca Q Q e. 3 r- � � E 3 W Ri T O 'G E �y T O 'fl cC C C p aa, cn m E a on cu a d rim° UQ X0.0 1 UGIUIa c c c A U E E E W c o c o 0 > > > Z C7 n. Q a Q Q oo � t E a E c _ o `a U (� m UG1 UCS W d' a. a a o 0 0 cc Qi • A O F U N rx 0. Q 4 d O N 3 T y c O v p 0 ta w Cr -E $ 0 on o o > ° a a t rclj ti A t p ~ N Lo D avi � •_ � 7 � .c �y c m � � C:� c 3 E > 4 O y O O G O 0 0. v E L 0 v cc 0 D m 3 s 0 E m ° o N ° o o .0 c n o o c H Uc 0 _ o - O acn a.._ OOU corio000 p = aUi �. C p G.° w .D O is ? y i cd C d Cl G. p3 € 0 s U O p °L U N . Q a ° ov > > 0 a E c = co v '� v ° on O O .= O m ca 7 C cc a L 00 y p w 0 OD LL"O c— .O C N U — C cd — F z U =O A td A — 0 G N ' U C D ° � O on �r a N 3 3 W mL � 0 °c° y c c G G Q F A F ,- 3 v c c cu y c u U o o a v o s o v0 •° U o.� s CQ7 Lo a0i ¢� c C7 a°i ¢ ° o U a m a wo 3 0 o c o a 3 0 `° •- � T CY, � y U o 0 � ti � y .n � ►.v N m m m - °? > D a a 0 0 . D a o 0 G o G ? c S U 4+ N G 0. 7 ,p O y G L � L O O O m O w 3 y W 3 LE o v . 0 � S U U a d a L 0. �o U o 0 U 10, U G O O_ cGa .0 L ° 7J L �' Q fC N N C E c C O C 7 E D o ro o y s G v o aci c LV�U E ° °; r G E q 103 cn 3 T >o .a 0 0 0 o T O U " � 6 0 0 g o ✓ 0 P � V N O• 4' r J UQ m � It Cy 65 7 y Q , d � � o A 7� a 4� vp j cy v d a 0 0 on ✓ > c6 O r v w o .- "O N N G mo N ✓ U N N Q UN N G 61 G O'.d N J r R GO N q -UD °CNu bb G y .N.- a .a ro G T U °� ✓ O G � °� of � � w U C • N t^ � T 1, Q' G no q, � A ° a� Uf °; '«�+ of ✓ '' m � '✓G G ' ✓° N 9 �° 3 s a 50° o o a ° G Go 0 6 q 7 v 7 S G o a{ ° m T�� a m °; Gn•o y b�''" U 'V ,,,.•7. A'� U N O bff fy. °✓. N N W G G•p O '"` ✓ N O cTC•'} �? �G ,,, C• 7� N ..- on^O r � � N "' i 't' r�_ � y � .^" .q .p •aNi �. `� G A � ', aNa ,� P U- a cf rn N �' � � r.r� N � � R 9 G N 7 G � �� ✓ � ,, r A� d LY N �� � O � bri 4iy 47 r N O pp d G ?, iC .� T O � *°.� ✓ � O N O G O'i.f C N r- G G U o S� o Q °� �` G D ✓ ° v �� 3 n m G N cf G .y v p N -.-' � F ✓ N U @ T " c0 ,,.. ✓ N ,r. N A G .- U GO i N U N O O y �y „ R K} "U � r � y1.O r y N ca i .p !� O• 3 � r .p G �' G Ot bfl Gl W.O✓ °) ° � rte.. � '� � rT. `!' N p. ✓ y N R 4 �� � d Q E � o. ' � Q a G ° oA G G :ty "U O •C1 � G U y o'an G O a� .v a � .� w •G W as a L p � v a - a u a 6 ofl G u 'b y ca '[7 N G paj G U „dp .> tG0 C* CZ p ,� v o 3 R u .. ty n o V5 -a ai y s o Ems° °' ° •9 i � '' ° U T y N U b O '..'i cm A N U A N 4J R O U r cGa GOD Ca,�, C- -R O D U -R 'O oR O cUa G N U U O ib �" N N U U u G n. o 0 o a U ' a . �= _ m r o m on'o D° oo vt:i 3 > OU A � �U-+ O R N p b0.15 G .�✓ A O w U 'L � +n iu'•-' � aKi � Paw ° � � G w b ="m °„ G N � � w x � '� � o p �, 'G i.. u 0 �O 6 P w U C O �7 wtd Q O M Y 'fl •U-+ DOu in ^Ry .N U � °O, [ �' .G �W-.'as 7Z F- U .0 ,.D ° y N O C7 G b r4 G u o >- a U Q Z w o c� �Qr� U V'7 LCCl 4 0 m aa, _ w U v G CzW7 1I J C7 a. Q C7 N T � U u� v a n cG W C] U Ga v CL O mw G7 N z a .n v T 4 p � �.. G O T tl o w N v 0 7 i.. on v F f-o U N CL a C7 m o ra o o w, Sr E co a. c 'c " g ca v E m c �? o o G N va o ,, ° a 'o .o vaCL > n y o c ° c v OV G O p Nu on o v UG accs o C N U ca .: G N i, G E �, � N ,Q N w � � v � " � 3 C z •° G cC vai ❑ [y 6n cC E v a cvi a E N ` . m w ° ani z o o o o U 9 g a x ° v D U N 'v o ° 2�.2 N D o E -r- ° d ' �r N uo s y OG > C c7 T v �'.E G F G G W f(.7, cNd Y .O N b w 'V .G O v w OU 'D v N O E i y w i-. a� m .N y x a� b O O O p 0 ° y 'C y c A v ? a a� G m U °' .5 3 U z c U Q v co a cn c aE 'D E G c y ° N M y cC O w o� �N 'O cC u 71 'O q 011 U . r- to CJ v 1113 E Q EE EE Q G O O C U > > U o co co — a a :3 UOUf� � c 0 0 U U O U vi m .c y aC aGi b ted b m . a a CL 0 u , ¢ a U_ v O 0. G > Q < Q • I O G G co O 3 m 3 E o s u 4 o ' Q C7 ° U HN mw Fo- NU m o 0 o cd w o v ° •o wT od 0 . a� G U o ti p w 0 o ° ai E b ani ai o on.Y o 7 = a s w w U 0 b v nv b on w `� °� D ro N a .� �' h c aCL p � DD 0. O "C •cn U aUi O aJ b O 7 U .p O N 0 0 cc .E m U a°i v o 3 0 U cc � h c E D k U °' m o oA op E > E s U" " [ _ C G 4., 'v c.0. O C O C G C C 'C N O O C U O O N C 0. O E t.., u N O y? U U U �n w b vi :5 U O cd C •DD cd C U U w e U .0 'a 0 N cGV '� U cCd °p.N ti' x O U O •2 M y O �; G O. oD = ••C rJ .L U Q. ,� Cj 00 F. O N O y ? C C U •U E S .0 •N �. >y E ci o con E •� E .o ° o ;j U °° N _ �' E N b O 0.cam„ O •C b G C Cd o °: a a a v v h ° o [� ° ° o°Jn E c^ r on U N 4) E m y C G �.. -E UC O c > O cd 3 U O c � U Y P. cGd ai ° -� -' m � . » k % \ . \ � \ . ƒ \ \ » . . f \ . \� 3ƒ /® . > o r �« v EXHIBIT 5 July 14, 2008 Staff Report And September 8, 2008 Supplemental Report J Agenda.Item# Conservation and'Development Contra Costa County EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JULY 14,2008—7:00 PM SUGAR BARGE MARINA AND RESORT EXPANSION I. INTRODUCTION RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC. :(Applicant), DAVID RIGGS (Owner), County Files #GP040001, #RZ063187 and #LP052026: Applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Land Use Permit as follows: A. General Plan Amendment(County File#GP04-0001): This is a request to change the General Plan land use designation from Single Family Residential-Low Density(SL)to Commercial Recreation (CR); B. Rezoning(County File#RZ063187):This is a request to rezone approximately 38 acres from A-2 (General Agricultural District) to R-B (Retail Business District); and C. Land Use Permit (County File #LP052026): This is a request for a Land Use Permit with Final Development Plan.approval to expand the Sugar Barge Resort and Marina by constructing 19 metal buildings for dry boat storage on 10.5 acres, establishing outdoor Dry Boat and Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage with parking on 13 acres. The property.is a 38-acre parcel located south of Willow Road and North of Sugar Barge Road in the unincorporated Bethel Island area. (Zoning: A-2) (General Plan: SL) (Census Tract: 3010.00) (Parcel# 030-110-006) (Zoning Atlas page: E-28) II. RECOMMENDATION A. Find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the East County Regional Planning Commission, and the Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to making a decision on the project; B. Find the Mitigated 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 Department as the custodian of the documents which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decision is based; East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP,052026 C. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Plan D. Find that on the basis of the whole record, the County has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment after mitigations; and E. Adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the requested change to the Land Use Element Map of the Contra Costa County General Plan(2005- 2020)to designate the 38 acre parcel from Single Family Residential Low-Density(SL) to Comcmercial Recreation (CR). r F. Adopt.a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed Rezoning of 38 acres from A-2 (General Agricultural) to R-B (Retail Business). G. Approve Final Development Plan and Land Use Permit combination, subject to the attached conditions and mitigation measures and contingent upon the Board's approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. H. Adopt the mitigation measures contained in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The property is currently designated SL(Single Family Residential Low-Density)under.the Land Use Element Map to the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020). B. Zoning: The area is zoned A-2(General Agricultural District withminimum parcel sizes of 5-acres) and FH (Flood Hazard Combining District). C. CEIDA Status: A Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted on June 26, 2006 for a 30 day comment period that ended on.July 27, 2006. (State Clearing House#2006052173). Impacts to geology,biology,noise, cultural,water, and land use,were identified as potentially significant unless mitigated. The applicant has agreed to mitigations that will reduce the impacts.During the comment period three letters were received in support and five letters were received in opposition. The response to these letters is presented under section VI of this report. D. Surrounding Land Use and Settings: The subject site is approximately 38 acres of vacant land located on the eastern end of Bethel Island. The site is defined as agric=ultural land and bordered on the north and east by Willow Road and single family residences within a Water Recreational Zoning District (F-1). On the south, and west side of the subject site are developed and undeveloped parcels zoned General Agricultural (A-2). S-2 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 E. Existing Site Description: The subject property where the 19 prefabricated metal buildings are proposed is vacant land below sea level.The property is relatively level with marshy grounds and scattered sand mounds. Higher elevations are found in the central portion-of the site and large interconnected depressions predominantly on the northern and western portion of the parcel. The site is partially drained by an irrigation ditch on the west side of the parcel.Approximately 15.30 acres is classified as jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the United States.The subject parcel is land proposed for the expansion to an existing project, the Sugar Barge Resort and Marina.The Sugar Barge-Resort and Marina is a privately owned recreational facility open to the public for recreational purposes with 114 RV parking spaces with full hook up sites, dry boat storage, campsites, picnic areas, boat berths, and a boat launching facility with a fuel dock, a recreational room, a swimming pool, convenience store and restaurant with a bar. F. Regulatory Programs: 1. Flood Hazards: This project is within Flood Zone A. The project site is considered a flood hazard and will be required to comply with the Floodplain Management Ordinance prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. Active Fault Zone: The project is not within an active fault zone.The active Concord fault line is located over 20 miles west of the site and the Greenville fault is located approximately 15 miles southwest. 3. Noise Hazards: The project is not located within a noise hazard area. 4. Previous Applications: A. LP032035: This application was withdrawn by the applicant on May 1, 2003. This application was the original request to amend an existing land use permit for the proposal of the Dry Boat/RV storage. B. LP962013: This application was approved on July 22, 1996 to expand an existing Marina with the following: Relocation of three existing boat sheds and parking areas on the levee; construct a 24-ft by 110 ft launching ramp;install 40 ft by 120 ft restaurant on pilings; 3,000 cubic yard dredge operation on Paper Slough. for boat navigation; installation of guest docks, fuel dock and sewage pump- out facility; and six 8 ft by 14ft off site sign at the corner of Piper Road and Sugar Barge Road. C. LP992106: This application was approved on August 24, 2000 authorizing an amendment to the existing land use permit for the addition of 220 Dry Boat storage units and the removal of 17 trees. S-3 East County Regional Planning.Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 IV. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed Sugar Barge and Marina expansion consist of the following: A. General Plan Amendment: The project site currently has the General_ Plan designation, Single Family Residential-Low Density (SL). The applicant is concurrently requesting a General Plan. amendment re-designating the site from Single Family Residential-Low Density (SL)to Commercial Recreation(CR); B. Rezoning: The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning application to change the: existing zoning designation from A-2 (General Agricultural) to R-B (Retail Business); and C. Land Use Permit and Final Development Plan:An application for approval of a final development plan and use permit for the construction of(19) metal buildings on paved asphalt concrete occupying 10.5 acres with four (4) buildings proposed at 116.5 ft(length) by 60 ft(width);and fifteen(15)buildings proposed at 160 ft.by 60 ft. and all buildings proposed with a maximum height of 17.4 ft.; • The construction of approximately 13 acres of compacted gravel open storage area for approximately 200 boats and recreational vehicles with no structures.; and • The preservation and avoidance of 14.62 acres of wetlands and permanently fill in 0.68 acres.for development of the project. In addition, the project proponent proposes (50) 9 ft by 19 ft parking spaces and a security fence controlled by an electronic automated gate system with hours of access from 6 A.M to 9 P.M. V. AGENCY COMMENTS A. Building Inspection Department: In a memorandum dated April 8, 2005 the Department will require a floodplain permit,survey stakes,compliance with the 2001 . California Building Codes,engineered stamped plans with engineering calculations. J B. Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division, Health Services Department: In a memorandum dated April 18, 2005 the Environmental Health indicated no continents since public sewage is provided. C. Public Works Department Flood Plain Representative: In a memorandum dated April 28, 2005 the Flood Plain Manager has indicated that floodplain permits are required for each building,flood resistant material is required and buildings must be vented in accordance with the Floodplain Management Ordinance requirements. S-4 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 D. Historical Resources Information System Center: In a memorandum dated April 28, 2005 the Center indicated the proposed project site has the possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological activities.A cultural resources report was prepared for the site on November 6,2002 in which the recommendations from this report have been incorporated into the mitigation measures and conditions of approval. E. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District: In a memorandum dated received May 4,2005 the District has listed twelve conditions the applicant must comply with prior to the Fire Departments approval. Attached is a copy of the detailed conditions. F. Sheriff Office Administration Svcs: In a memorandum dated April 19, 2005 the Sheriff Department has indicated no comments for this project. G. Ironhouse Sanitary District: In a memorandum dated April 28, 2005 the District indicated no comments for this project. H. Delta Protection Commission: In a memorandum dated June 28, 2005 the Commission has provided advisory comments suggesting development of the site could impact the habitat and water quality values of the waters of the Primary Zone, overload launching facilities in the area, or impact the carrying capacity of nearby waterways and thus impact the quality of the recreation experience.The number and size of vessels that could be stored in the proposed facility should be described. Impacts to local habitat such as increased night lighting should be addressed. No comments were received from the Bethel Island MAC or Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District. VI. CEQA REVIEW ON THE PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Staff received written comments (attached) from the following agencies: Delta Protection Commission,East Bay Municipal Utility District and State Clearinghouse. In addition,staff received several letters from the public in support and in opposition. This section will briefly address some of the concerns raised in opposition to the project. Comment 1: There are Swainson Hawks, Harrier, and Red tail nesting, owls,pond turtles, frogs and garter snakes. The land in question has been an accepted wetland with its connected biodiversity of animal, plant and wildlife ecosystems. Bethel Island is on the Pacific Flyway and is.visited each year by numerous species of birds on migration. Response to Comment 1:A"Wetland Delineation report and a Biological Resources Survey was prepared by LSA Associates Inc., a biological consulting firm that surveyed the site to identify endangered species and map potential waters. Potential wetlands were determined by visual observation of low lying areas and hydrophytic vegetation and plants. The consulting firm has contacted the-Corps of Engineers. The Corp has verified the wetland area. A mitigation measure has been incorporated to ensure the individual permit S-5 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 authorization from the United States Army Corp of Engineers and certification approval from the'Regional Water Quality Control Board are obtained. Comment 2: The runoff from the project will cause flooding in the neighborhood and wetlands that will contain gas and oil drippings. Response to Comment 2: Portions of the proposed dry storage have been designed to drain into the designated wetlands area by initially flowing into approximately 2.75 acres of vegetated landscaped areas, this approach is considered acceptable because the natural wetlands and landscaped.area are surfaces for treatment of runoff from impervious areas. This proposal complies with the new requirements of the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance as mandated by the California Regional Water Quality. Control Board (RWQCB) because the runoff is being treated and/or saturated naturally before entering drains. In addition the applicant is required to comply with the measures of the Storm'Water Pollution Prevention Plan and submit the Plan to the RWQCB to mitigate construction related impacts on area drains. Comment 3: Traffic on Willow Road has increased at all hours of the day and night.Willow Road is used as the main access to Sugar Barge. The road is narrow and winding. I have experienced dangerous situations in which large vehicles towing large boats have taken the entire road preventing the movement of opposing traffic. On each side of Willow Road there is either an open ditch or heavy vegetation making it difficult to move around.The owner of Sugar Barge does not route traffic through the RV park instead RV's are permitted down Sugar Barge while cars and boats are directed to Piper Road to Willow.Road. Response to Comment 3: The applicant will be required to widen Willow Road according to the requirements and standards of the Public Works Department due to the expansion of Sugar Bargeand in consideration of other similar facilities in the area. The project has been ' conditioned to.construct pavement widening and transitions for an ultimate half-width along the frontage of Willow Road. The applicant will be granted an exemption from installation of frontage improvements along Willow Rd. prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit, provided a Deferred Improvement Agreement is executed. Comment 4: What provisions are the County and Bethel Island making to ensure that the roads,drainage,etc.remain in order?Is the applicant supplying funds or civil improvements to mitigate the negative impact that the change in designation is producing? Response to Comment 4: The applicant will be required to comply with the conditions of approval as required by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits. Conditions have been incorporated to ensure road and drainage improvements comply with the rules and regulations of the Department and pavement widening occurs for Willow road and the future acceptance of Sugar Barge Rd. S-6 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 Comment 5: Franks Tract State Park and.surrounding sloughs are experiencing an unprecedented number of boats using this area,resulting in dangerous amounts of traffic.The environmental degradation due to the amount of boating activity is apparent to the naked eye. Comment 5: On September 22, 2006 Staff contacted the State of California Boating and Waterways and inquired on any statute of limitations and laws regarding the number of boaters'use of the Delta waters and possible hazardous release of emissions from the boat usage. The Department informed staff that the Boating and Waterways Department has no limits or laws that regulate the number of boats. In fact, the Department stated that the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB) and Air Quality District regulates water quality and emission. This project's environmental initial study was distributed for a 30-day comment period to the State Clearinghouse which included the Regional Quality Water Control Board in which no comments were received. However, the project developer will be required to prepare a Water Quality Certification application and submit the required supporting information for review and approval by the RWQCB. VII. STAFF ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION A. Wetland Areas: The subject parcel is a 38 acre site, in which 15.30 acres has been delineated as jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the United States based on a site verification visit and letter dated May 3, 2000 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The project proposes impact to approximately 0.68 acres {14.62 acres remaining} of Corp jurisdiction with permanent fill for construction of the proposed project.The applicant is mitigating wetland impacts off-site by creating new seasonal wetlands at a ratio of 1:1 (created: filled). A Corps Individual Permit application (wetlands mitigation plan) 404(b) (1) Alternative Analysis to facilitate the Corps authorization of the project must be submitted and approved. In addition,the project developer shall provide a copy of the Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB)pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. This certification from the RWQCB is needed in order for the Corps authorization to be valid. However, the RWQCB requires evidence of CEQA compliance which at this moment is pending approval by the Commission and ultimately depending on the approval of the General Plan Amendment by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors.Mitigation measures have been incorporated to ensure compliance. B. General Plan Amendment: A General Plan Amendment for the project is concurrently under review. The site presently is designated as Single Family Residential-Low Density (SL) which allows between 1.0-2.9 units per net acre. Under the current General Plan designation the establishment of dry boat storage and recreational uses is not permitted.However,it would allow for primary uses such as single family homes. S-7 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 The General Plan's,Commercial Recreation (CR) designation allows a range of privately owned recreational uses of a commercial character, including marinas and campgrounds. The reason the CR designation was considered is based on the consistency with the Bethel Island policies and limitation of residential development as.implemented by the County Costa County General Plan,and its location relative to the existing Sugar Barge facility which is currently consistent with the Bethel Island policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Amendment and Rezoning would be consistent with the following policies that guide development on the Island. Policy 3-55: The approval of new development.shall be limited to 2,909 primarily recreation-oriented units in the off-island area. (i.e., 3,000 additional units including the 91 units already approved, but not yet built) Policy 3-56: New residential development in the on-island area.shall be limited at this time to approved development and one dwelling unit per parcel. C. 'Zoning Compliance: The change in the Zoning District from A-2 (General Agricultural)to R-B(Retail Business District)could be consistent with the proposed CR(Commercial Recreation)General Plan designation and allows the establishment of dry boat storage and outdoor RV storage with the issuance of a land use permit, whereas, the A-2 zoning district would not be consistent with the proposed General Plan and does not permit the use of the property for RV storage. D. Site and Grading Preparation: The grading plan prepared and the Stormwater Control Plan provided shows approximately 4.6 acres of paved areas draining through landscaped areas and into the wetlands as a means for treatment and compliance with the County's Stormwater Management Guidelines.The landscaped areas will provide a natural filtration and settlement before the water drains to the wetlands. Once the water flows toward the wetlands the filtration and settlement process continues until evaporation. In addition, the site improvements will be constructed to drain runoff from approximately 4.93 acres into vegetated swales on site and across Sugar Barge Road to an irrigation ditch owned by Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District(B.I.M.I.D). Since the site is below sea level and ground water is located approximately two feet below finished grade, some grading of the site will occur to drain the site as described above. The site does not contain any trees. Development will involve 23.5 of the 38 acre site. E. Drainage: All storm water entering and/or originating on this property shall be collected and conveyed without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage system, to a natural watercourse having definable beds and banks, or to an existing adequate storm drainage system which conveys the storm waters to an adequate natural watercourse. S-8 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ06')187,LP052026 The applicant shall be permitted to collect and convey storm waters to a drainage facility maintained by an Improvement District(BIMID)provided that the applicant provides written substantiation from the Irrigation District that it accepts the storm water in perpetuity,owns fee title to the drainage facility from the point of discharge to the natural watercourse, and the Improvement District facility is adequate to handle the design storm based on ultimate development anticipated in the area. F. Parking and Landscape: The subject land use permit is subject to compliance with the Off—Street Parking Ordinance.According to Chapter 82-16,which designates the amount of parking required for the use,the site needs to provide 19 parking spaces that are 9 ft by 19 ft. with planter or landscaping strips with an irrigation system at least four feet in width adjacent to street right of ways. Since the project is creating approximately 2.0 acres of landscaping for treatment of runoff these acres shall be sufficient for compliance with the Off-Street Parking Ordinance landscape. requirements.The prof ect developer shall provide for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator a Final Landscape Plan prepared by a certified and licensed biologist or Landscape Architect to ensure the trees, shrubs,and vegetation selected will endure the sandy soil type and below sea level elevation and proper planting. G. Traffic and Circulation: Willow Road,a public road,has a current pavement width of approximately 18-20 feet and is located within a 60-foot right of way.The ultimate planned pavement width on Willow Road is 40 feet.However,the applicant will not be required to widen the roadway along the project frontage considering that the proposed project does not gain access to Willow Road,but only,on Sugar Barge Road and no improvements are proposed along the eastern frontage. It also appears that a majority of boats that will be placed in storage at this proposed facility will utilize Sugar Barge Road to access the boat ramps at Sugar Barge Marina located to the east of the storage site. Although the 60 foot wide right of way on Willow Road is adequate, the applicant will be required to dedicate additional right of way(for roadway purposes)to allow a smooth curve offset 30 feet from the existing centerline of the road,at the angle point located approximately 343 feet north of the southeastern corner of the subject property. Sugar Barge Road is a private road with a current pavement width of approximately 22 feet.In anticipation of potential acceptance of this road by the County as a public road,the applicant shall dedicate to the County.60 feet of right of way necessary for the future planned width of 60 feet along the-project frontage of Sugar Barge Road. The applicant shall be permitted an exception from construction of frontage improvements on Sugar Barge Road considering that it is currently a private road, provided that a Deferred Improvement Agreement (DIA) is executed to construct them at a later time.To stay consistent with future planned improvements along other sections of Sugar Barge Road, the applicant shall execute a DIA requiring construction of pavement widening to provide a 20-foot Half-width,longitudinal and S-9 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GP040001,RZ063187,LP052026 transverse drainage,necessary street lighting and temporary conforms for paving and drainage along the project frontage of Sugar Barge Road. H. Stormwater Mana eg merit: This project is required to be in full compliance with the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, the Stormwater' "C.3" Guidebook (available at www.cccleanwater.or ) and the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. A Stormwater Control Plan received on February 7,2006 by the Community Development Department was . reviewed and determined to'be preliminary complete. Although the Stormwater Control Plan has been determined to be preliminarily complete,it remains subject to revision based on changes made during the preparation of improvement plans, as necessary, to better address compliance with C.3 stormwater requirements. I. Annexation to Lighting District: The subject parcel is already.annexed into the County Service Area L-100 lighting district. Therefore, the applicant will not be required to apply for annexation to County Service Area L-100 Lighting District. VIII. CONCLUSION The whole of the project does not adversely affect the environment with the implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring Program. Though the project amends the General Plan and proposes changes to the respective zoning district the project promotes the policies for the Bethel Island area as established within the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020). Therefore, staff recommends the East.County Regional Planning Commission approve the Land Use Permit with a Final- Development Plan contingent upon the Board of Supervisors approval to change the General Plan designation and rezone the parcel. G:curr-plan/staffrpt/LP052026 staff report LCC/rev.12/20/06/rev2. 6/26/08 5-10 Agenda Item* Community Development Contra Costa County Supplemental Report and Request to add conditions EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8,2008—7:00 PM SUGAR BARGE MARINA AND RESORT EXPANSION 1. INTRODUCTION RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC. (Applicant), DAVID RIGGS (Owner), County Files GP04- 0001;RZ063187 and LP052026:Applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Land Use Permit as follows: A. General Plan Amendment#GP04-0001: This is a request to change the General Plan land use designation from Single Family Residential Low-Density(SL)to Commercial Recreational (CR); B. Rezoning # RZ063187: This is a request to rezone approximately 38 acres from A-2 (General Agricultural District) to R-B (Retail Business District); and C. Land Use Permit # LP052026: This is a request for a Land Use Permit with Final Development Plan approval to expand the Sugar Barge Resort and Marina by constructing 19 metal buildings for dry boat storage on 10.5 acres and establishing approximately 13 acres of open space for outdoor Dry Boat and Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage with parking on a 38-acre parcel. The property is located South of Willow Road and North of Sugar Barge Road in the unincorporated Bethel Island area. (Zoning: A-2) (General Plan: SL) (Census Tract: 3010.00) (Parcel # 030-110-006) (Zoning Atlas page: E-28) 11. BACKGROUND The East County Regional Planning Commission at its July 14, 2008 public hearing received testimony and continued the items referenced above to September 8, 2008 to allow staff to obtain additional information pursuant to boat storage, conditions, and review of comments submitted by the City of Oakley. Below, staff has provided a response to each question. I�. East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GPA040001,RZ063187,LP052026 .Supplemental Report-Sept. 8,2008 1. The East County Regional Planning Commission requested comments from the Bethel Island MAC regarding the proposed project. Response: On May .11, 2005, the Bethel Island MAC responded with comments which indicate their approval.Attached as Exhibit A is a copy of the minutes from the meeting and documentation which shows the comments were forwarded to the project planner in 2005. 2. The East: County Regional Planning Commission allocated time for County staff to review the City of Oakley's letter and request for a condition of approval regarding the proposed project fair share of contributions on issues covered in the County and City Agreement as part of the annexation of the East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan. Response: The project as proposed would be subject to the Bridge/thoroughfare Fee 'Ordinance requirements for the Bethel Island Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board'of Supervisors. These fees must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit.The advisory note under Section E on page 20 advises the applicant of this requirement. The methodology used by the Public Works Department for a facility such as Sugar Barge is based on the number cf peak hour trips generated by the proposed use. (Exhibit B provides.this documentation) 3. The .East County Regional Planning Commission requested a review of previous conditions of approval, specifically the Deferred Improvement Agreement (DIA) on Sugar Barge Road,to inform why the DIA has not been called and determine if nexus or legality-exist to request the DIA as a result of the new proposal. . Response:As a condition of approval for the Land Use Permit(LP 2013-96)authorizing the Sugar Barge Marina to be established on the parcels immediately to the east of the subject parcel, the owner/applicant entered into a Deferred Improvement'Agreement (DIA) to construct a 32 foot wide paved roadway through a new curving alignment for Sugar Barge Road that`would approximate the western and northern boundary ofthe subjeetparcels. The DIA also required installation of drainage facilities, street lights, conform paving, and payment offees to review the improvement plans and inspection fees after installation of these improvements. The construction of these improvements are specified to begin when any one of the following occurs; 1) the County Public Works Director determines that there is no./urther reason to defer construction of the improvements because their construction is necessary for the public health, welfare, and safety and/or is necessary for the orderly development of the surrounding area, 2)Sugar Barge is constructed to its ultimate planned width by the County or by an assessment district, or 3)Frontage improvements are constructed adjacent to the subject property. Sugar Barge Road is currently a private roadway. The County has no plans (or identified funding source) to improve Sugar Barge Road to its ultimate planned width. Even if the S-2 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GPA040001,RZ063187,LP052026 Supplemental Report-Sept. 8,2008 current development were required to improve Sugar Barge Road to meet Public Road Standards along the project frontage and the DIA improvements were required to be completed prior to approval of this permit, the County would not accept the road as a Public Roadway. The roadway could not be accepted for public maintenance considering that a significant portion of Sugar Barge Road between the subject parcel and Piper Road(to the west) is not constructed to public road standards and features no offers of dedication to the County. Therefore, unless the entire roadway was to be improved to public road standards and contained in an adequate public road right of way, the County would not accept it as a Public Road. Considering that the County has no plans for improving Sugar Barge Road to Public Road Standards, there is no nexus to construct the improvements identified in the DIA as apart of this permit. 4. The Commission request additional information on the proposed gravel parking locations and RV leakage and impacts on groundwater aquifer in relation to the Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. Response: The applicant shall be required to meet provision C.3 of the Clean Water requirements, as established by the RWQCB, which require the installation of storm water treatment features that are intended to remove pollutants prior to discharge into the area wide storm water conveyance systems. The preliminarily complete Stormwater Control Plan is subject to revision prior to the final Stormwater Control Plan being deemed compliant with the Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance(County Code Section 1014). We recommend adding COA#50A and#50B, which will require the Final Stormwater Control Plan to demonstrate that the project will not impact drinking water quality for any nearby wells and provide any Best (or Integrated) Management Practices (BMP/IMP) necessary for this purpose. It should be noted that gravel surfacing is more permeable and therefore preferable over impervious surfacing when considering pollutant removal. However, when analyzing potential impacts to groundwater quality, the Health Services Department or other. . regulatory agency.may have additional comments. We recommend the following Conditions of Approval be added: 50A. Prior to approval, the final Stormwater Control Plan shall adequately demonstrate that the "non-traditional" Stormwater Management BMP features (such as CDS units, natural swales, ect.)proposed in the preliminary Stormwater Control Plan shall be shown to provide a degree of stormwater treatment compliant with the NPDES permit and/or equivalent to the degree of treatment provided by traditional BMPs designed and sized in accordance with the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. S-3 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GPA040001,RZ063187,LP052026 Supplemental Repoil-Sept. 8,2008 50B. The final Stormwater Control Plan shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Health Services Department(Environmental Health Division) or other appropriate regulatory agency, that this development will not significantly impact water quality in nearby drinking wells. 5. The Commission requested staff to look into operation hours,lighting and landscaping for the proposed project. Response: The project conditions of approval contain two conditions which addresses landscaping and lighting for the project. Condition of approval#S on page 5 address the lighting and condition of approval #6 and #7 address the Final Landscape for the site. Attached are those conditions pertaining to landscape and lighting. (Exhibit C shows these conditions in detail) The applicant has indicated an agreement to the hours of operation for the facility to be dusk to dawn. if approved by the East County Regional Planning Commission, the conditions would be modified to include this limit on the hours of-operation or those as determined by the Commission. Recommended Condition to be added for hours of operation: 20a. Hours of Operation from dusk to dawn. 6. The Commission requested status on a letter submitted, circa 2005,to the County Ag Task Force in regards to boat storage. Response: County staff continues to work on a possible amendment and is considering a overlay zoning district for the Bethel Island area that would address.boat storage. In addition,staff':is requesting the conditions of approval be modified to add three additional conditions as recommended, by the Department of Conservation and Development under question number 5 above for hours of operation and as recommended by the Public Works Department under question number 4 above. III. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the East County Regional Planning Commission, and the Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to making a decision on the proj ect; B. Find the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis and was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act i S-4 East County Regional Planning Commission Files: GPA040001,RZ063187,LP052026 Supplemental Report-Sept. 8,2008 (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines and designated the Community Development Department as the custodian of the documents which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decision is based; C. Find that on the basis of the whole record, the County has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment after mitigations; and D. Adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the requested change to the Land Use Element Map of the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005- 2020)to designate the 38 acre parcel from Single Family Residential Low-Density(SL) to Commercial Recreation (CR). E. Adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed Rezoning of 38 acres from A-2 (General Agricultural) to R-B (Retail Business). F. Approve Final Development Plan and Land Use Permit combination, subject to the attached modified conditions and mitigation measures and contingent upon the Board's approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. G. Adopt the mitigation measures contained in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. IV. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The property is currently designated SL(Single Family Residential Low-Density)under the Land Use Element Map to the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020). B. Zoning: The area is zoned A-2(General Agricultural District with minimum parcel sizes of 5-acres). C. CEQA Status: A Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted on June 26, 2006 for a 30 day comment period that ended on July 27, 2006. (State Clearing House#2006052173). Impacts to geology,biology,noise, cultural, water, and land use were identified as potentially significant unless mitigated. The applicant has agreed to mitigations that will reduce the impacts. During the comment period three letters were received in support and five letters were received in opposition. The response to these letters is presented under section VI of this report. G:curr-plan/staffrpt/LP052026 supp. report LCC/9/4/08 S-5 E�LIB1T '� uul Iv vu It—oc .J auycxl oC11yC 1\V f\GAVII a�avo-roat� N•� FBEIT.HEL . IS- LAND MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COUNCIL , P.O.BOX 1388 - BETHa ISLAND, CA 94511 FAX ## (925) 684-9131 FACSIMILE TO: Lashun Cross FROM: BETHEL ISLAND MAC DATE: 5111/2005 # OF PAGES': 3 including cover sheet SUBJECT: County File# DP053030 Modification to Landscape/Site plan to include a recreational pool center and an equipmentlstorage building at Willow Parr Marina III Applicant: Reacox Associates APPROVED SUBJECT: County File # LP0632026 Request for approval to existing Land Use Permit to expand Sugar Barge Resort and Marina Applicant: Riggs Enterprises,Inc. APPROVED SERVING BETHEL ISLAND, HOTCHKISS TRACT&JERSEY ISLAND JOE STOKLEY, SR., BELINDA BFTTNER, KIT SANDERS,DANK WERS &RALPH WALLACE ALTERNATE: KEN KAU P"� �_,Ql 1 1_1 1 11.11 Illy UU1 ILI Cl Community aeveiopmerrt Director /. Development Costa Department County County Administration Building 651 Pine Street 41h Floof> Borth Wing '' Martinez, California 94553-0095 's Phone, (925)335.1210 y Dater lr} " AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST We.request your comments regarding the attache..application currently under review. DISTRIBUTION Please submit you omments as follows: Building Inspection HSD,Environmental Health,.Coneord Project Planne SSD,Hazardous Materials P/W -Flood Control (Full Size) County File PM' -`Engineering Svcs (Full Size) Number— Date Forwarded PfW.Traffic(Reduced) Prior To: `P/W Special Districts (Reduced) Comprehensive Planning We have found the following special programs Redevelopment Agency apply to this application: Historical Resources Information System CA Native Amer.Her.Comm. 0*4 Redevelopment Area CA Fish & Game,Region US Fish &Wildlife Servtce V% Active Fault Zone Fire District IFpsr C o r b 1= fes, AFlood Sanitary District •r�J 30%— Hazard Area,Panel# Water District City 60 dBA Noise Control School District Sheriff Office-Admin. & Comm.. Svcs. CA EPA Hazardous VVaste Site Alamo Improvement Association X� El Sobrgaynte Plg. & Z,oning.Committee Traffic Zone I]OIT- Dep. Director, Communications CEQA Exempt ^ ^at ^xe.^n.. :ea ce^dv. Community Organizations Ir 006 »,c.,r�&A, Please indicate the code section of recommendatious that are required by law or ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the Applicant& Owner. —No comments on this applicatio —Our Comments are attached Comments: Signature Agency S:current planningltemptateslforen i2gencti continent request Date Office Hours Mon-day - Friday:8:00 a.m_- 5:00 F.rn, Office is closed the 1s.• 3rd & 5th Fridays of each month - M Dennis M.Barry, AICP ugmmunity uont1ra Community Development Director Development p. Costa DepartmentCounty County Administration Building 651 Pine Street LL. 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez,California 94553-4095 . : Phone: (925)335-1.210 -`- v Date: �+ �i tJ� }r�tart AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST We requestyour comments regarding the attached appllication current!y under review. DISTRIBUTION Please submit your comments as,follows: ullding Inspection /11.) - _HSD, Environmental Health,Concord Project Planner _HSD, Hazardous Materials _v-"PIW -Flood Control(Full Size) .County File . /PIR'-Engineering Svcs(Full Size). !dumber: Date Forwarded P/W Traffic(Reduced) Prior To:__ ex 995 PtW Special Districts (Reduced) _Comprehensive Planning We have found the following special programs Redevelopment Agency apply to this application: —Historical Resources'Information System TCA Native Amer.,Her.Comm., !Ib Redevelopment Area CA Fish &Game,Region US Fish & Wildlife Service. Active Fault Zone IZ Fire District 5,GS-F co k/ anitary District Ino u Se N Flood Hazard Area, Panel# Water District lei I�-i t o Li�Gt# v tic`s t/City Dpr U.e– - 60 dBA Noise Control School District ,r Sheriff Office-Admin. &Comm.Svcs. N CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site Alamo Improvement Association - _El Sobran P a. &Zo ng Committee Traffic.Zone fMACm-1_ �Clr ted DOIT -Dap.Director,Communications CEQA Exempt CAC K-7A Alamo C41 R . .nempti^n Se4rtio n Community Organizations � P P. Please indicate the code section of recommendations thatare required bylaw or ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the Applicant & Owner. No comments on this application. Y Our Cotrim is are attached Comments: r� '" Signature Agency S.-current planning/tempiates/formslagency cornment request Date (l Office Hours Monday- Friday:8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1st, 3rd S 5th Fridays of each month 1,SLANDMUNICIPAL UNICIP A .DVI$ORY OUNCIL P.O.BOX 1388,BETHEL ISLAND,CA 94511-1388 j Date" : 6114/2005 Placz ;.BIMID.I Za]L l ethel'Island,.CA 94.51] Fly.Salute 7:02 Members Present D.Myers,K. Sanders,J.Stokley,,IKen`Mau;Belinda Bittner Members Absent - R.Wallace.:. Xnoo val"of Amada K Sanciers`u1*mafioa to approve;J. Stoklev seconded Apgrayed Appioval of IVlinutes of Prec7crus Meet�ntr . $ittnei"s�taed that Blckserry Fesfival fid zs held on Uctf :,This noted, J. Stokley,made motion w approve;B. Bittner.seconded Aut�roved Treasurer's/Firtancial:Ri�ort R Wallace:,. Youth tkcd .$2,007.38,.MAC.Acct: $1,43.8.07 ,. Guest Speakers. .... . Lynn Riechard: `Staff rHst.V:'.. Not in attendance Sheriffs'Dept.IResident Deputy's Sgt_ Matt Malone passed out report. There were 37 reports,with three arrests. Sgt Malone advised MAC that Sgt.Katz is no longer working the Island. Also stated that there is possibility that funds used for derelict vessel abatement A ill be cut for the next budget year. Public Comment Ken Mau: More eviction notices were listed on Bethel Island's Eviction Action.Notificarion (0eneirai Information only) Lisa Kirk: Passed out flyers regarding general plan on Bethel Island Is interested.i n bringinglmnee.up-to certain level,possibly using funds from DUC Housing. Included was information from Dept. of Water Resources. Bruce Biaggi:Boat named"Incognito"is in bis area and is damping waste. Was advised to call Marine Patrol and.report.it to Sgt.Duke,427-8507 or 427-8511. Board member Ken Mau stated.be will also report. Neighborhood Watch Committee Reports I. Code Enforcernent� I. Campbell 8 cases opened this month, 5 closed,balance 7 active cases. 2. Jr. MAC No Report 3. BICC Belinda Bittner. absent-will move forward to Julv 50`s Bash July 16 & 17*. September 17,2005 8th Annual Pot 0'Gold Raffle$10,000 September 24&25,2005. Bethel Island Triathlon&Open Water Swim October 2005 2t}Q5 Citizen of the Year Awards October I&2,2005 ` 1'Annual BlaGckberry Festival November 19-26,2005 57th.Annual Fish Derby 4. B.I.Bridge- refer to info presented by Supv. Glover 5. 799 No Report 6. B.I.M.I.D. M. Lawry: Next meeting 3prn at BIMID Hall, I Fire/Public$stfety rids and Kites to take place next to Fire House on June 18th . 8.CAI.IFED BAYIDELTA groom J. Stokiey Broke!! 9_Transportation Committee D. Myers: 10. Ad Hoc Park Committee. M. Lawry: Carreonspence 1. S> ,oCd� iGetatass . 1 ?:8 rYau _ 1, 2• 'Notice of Relr 3. Contra Costa i',3 c1 Sa c ct i e -415105 1, Request for approval of a variance to total height of a.proposed SRF.34'requested, 35' allowed Applicant:Richard Kent County File#VR 05103.1 R_W&Uar4z4.dg,motion to approve,J. Stokley seconded Annroved Wlitl►condition maadmunri hea�htltresase�t d13 �and sQrinklers ane installed:n,,,:' - 2. Additional storage buildings and use of omq ing grounds for stomge.of trailers,boats,.ve ucles and Mrs dt Hennis.Ntarina_Applicant:,Hennis Maxima County File*DP043852 Mevised R Wallace made motion to approve,.K. Sanders seconded e ;. 3; In av, .,,, �.,.. �� s . �''�i+Thl'Ma�:absiaine�i 4. Mod fi �r ( p1aa1+o int Tiirle'a•r�eationell PM pool cemer amd an equipment/storage building at illory 'ark Marina III Ajphm►t: Heacox Associates County File#DP05M30` J. Stokley made motion to approve, K. Sanders seconded Approved 5. Request to establish 1 to 3 natural gas wells.Applicant:ABA Energy, Sacraznento,CA County Fite#LP05-32026 K. Sanders made motion to approve,J. Stokley seconded ApprovrA with condition that sound wall is constructed that will reduce noise levels to 85 dbe or below. New Bnsinm ;,.None Old Business Name changes on Mac accounts Ana+an�tcernerrts.:-;,:: ;:N'otie - .. • .. .. . . Adjourned Adsouraed: 9:15 p.m. Resp-ectfu�Y Subtutted neCa . ..ntgbe lllreiratdin Ireg sec 6/1412005 SERVING BETH ISLAI TD,HOTS9 TIt.ACT t�.AERSEY ISLAND JOE STOKLEY, SR,BELINDA BITTNER,DAM qM"''YEI§' M,SA ERS, RALPH WALLACE ALTERNATE:KBN MA _v i t _ r� _... ... .... .�. +.. ...+y.. �... yam. �„ .�..... ac.wv-rv.rta N• 2~"}� CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USUPEPOVU JA' Ptl' TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT OR 0«TER OWNEI APPLICANT Name 4 s Name , Address C) 1`-f Address G2 _ ?or6ox 1tt'-l0 City,Statee, i,p C City, State a„X CA 911�5711 Phone Phone 4 ' & y _ C 7 By signing below, owner agrees to pat all costs, including any accrued By signing below, applicant agrees to pay-17--c-st.&Jor processing this interest,if the applicant Goes norpay costs, application, plus any accrued interest, f the costs are of paid within 30 o Check here if biilin�to ent to applicant ra er than owner, days of invoicing. Owner's signatu Appficani's signature J CONTACT PERSON (optional) PROJECT DATA Name- i Total Parcel Size: ' - r- s Address Prol)osed Number of Units: �e� City,State Proposed Square Footage: G`j[,pC? oe Phone Estimated Project Value: 3,5` DESCRIPTION-OF REQUEST(attach supplemental statement if ne;essary): r i ti )/Applicali APPLICANT REQUESTS APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING LAND USE PERMIT TO EXPAND A -RIARINA (SUGAR BARGE RESORT &. MARINA) BY CONSTRUCTING 19 METAL BUILDINGS 'AND PROVIDING OUTSIDE PARKING ON A 38 ACRE SITE. IN ASSOCIATION WITH THIS APPLICATION IS A GENERAL, PLAN AMENDMENT (GP04-©001) THAT CHANGES THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FROM — SL(SINGLE FAMILY LOW)TO CR(COMMERCIAL RECREATION) PROPERTY IS A. 38-ACRE SITE ADDRESSED AT W LLOW ROAD IN THE BETIIEL ISLAND Property c AREA. ff Ordinance Ref.; 'TYPE OF FEE FEE I S-CODE Assessor's No..-O Area: *Base Fee,'D osisq.;0 S- 6,-.Vt Site Address: Late F iling Penalty Fire.District: Ag; (+501/o ofabove if a licable' $ S-065 Zoning.District: — !/21,o est. value Sphere of influent: over 5.100,000. $W_a pa S-029 Census Tract: C� 0 ##L7nits: ' x$195.00 S Flood Zone: PC Sq.Ft. x SO-20 S S-014 Atlas Page: — $l5 0/ Pane]?�tuznber. Notification Fee 30 0 S-052 General Plan: ,._ Fish&Game Posting x-ref Files: (ifnot'CE A exerr,o!) $50.00 S-048 LP/DP Combination: - YESaotl Env, Health,De t. $33,00 5884 Supervisorial District: Other: 51 Received b Concurrent Files: TOTAL -- Date Filed: �t - Receipt# File Number: L + S'• 2nd, 'Additional fees based on4ime and materials will be charged if staff casts exceed'lose fee. INSTRUC'T'IONS ON REVERSE SIDE SUBMITTING YOUR APPLICATION r 1. PREPARE a plot(site) plan, floor plans and buil ding.elevations clearly and legibly drawn to a commonly.use.d scale,with the follawing nif'orrriahon an4 verify(by tnitlaling)that the:infoxrpaLion is included on the:plans: .Applicant's . lnitials Plot(site)Plan a. All existing property lines labeler]-and fully dimensioned. b. All public and private roads, easements and drainage installations adjacent to the subject parcel(s): c. .All existing and proposed improvements(including drainage)with distances to all property lines. . d. Distance from property lines to existing improvements on parcels adjoining the subject parcel(s). e.. Names.of adjoining property pwner(s). f. Topographic contours-labeled with elevation;known geologic hazards, creeks/streams and drainage ditches. g. Location, species, drip lines and trunk diameters of all trees with a diameter of 6 inches or greater,measured 41/, fee above ground whose trunks lie within 50 feet of any proposed improvements. This shall include all such trees on th( subject property as well as trees on adjoining properties whose canopy extends onto the subject property.Number thf trees for identification purposes and indicate if they are to be removed or altered in anyway. h. North arrow and scale. � I. Existing and proposed parking layouts,driveways artd landscaped areas(all fully dimensioned). j. Computations of lot coverage, gross floor area and landscaped areas(all indicated in square feet). k. Area of the subject parcel(s)officially mapped within the boundary of a Special Flood Hazard Area(if applicable). I. A vicinity map showing sufficient information such as streets, highways, railroad tracks, water bodies, landmarks etc to locate the subject parcel(s). Floor Plans m All rooms,hallways and other common areas Agth their dimensions and use(i.e.bedroorn,kitchen, etc.). n. Locations of doorways, stairways and landings, windows, permanent fixtures (sinks, toilets, showers, etc.) and major meccaeuiprnent(hot.water heaters,fiuoaces„etc.). q. Building Elevations o• Exterior dimensions (height,,width, depth) of all proposed improvements. Height is measured at the point within the building footprint that has the greatestdistance between the ground and the top of the building directly above. p. Proposed lexteTior ornamentation such as shutters,planting boxes,window trim,cornices-,signs,railings,etc. q. Proposed exterior materials(i.e. wood siding,stucco, stone veneer, concrete tile roof,etc.). 2. IlA'ND DELIVER(do not mail)the.following to the Contra Costa.County Application&Petrnit'Center- q. Three (3) full size sets of glans (no larger than 24” x 36") and twelve (12)reduced sets (no larger than 11" x 17"). All sets must be folded to approximately 81h"x 1 i".Rolled plans will not be accepted. r. Completed application-forth(reverse side of this sheet). s. `"Important Notice to AO]icants." Nue;.form).signed and'oatel, t. *Required-deposit and miscellaneous fees. Checksmaybe made payable to Contra Costa County. " Please note that the fees described on this form are related only to the Contra Costa County Community Development and Public Works 1(925) 313-20001 departments' costs for processing your application. Additional fees and requirements may be imposed by federal, state and local agencies that may be involved in reviewing your project. It is the applicant's responsibility to investigate whether additional fees and,requirements will be imposed. APPLICANT'VERMCA77ON I verify that all of th o submitted as indicated by my initials is,complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and further acknowle that should it e found that any of the information is incorrect or incomplete it may result in increased processing time and! . acknowledge t at all staff costs are borne by the.applicant and if necessary,.additional deposits will be required. I also c owledge t I have co letely read this form and understand all of the information stated-herein SignatuT Name (print) l (pa,,'c/� ; Date S.2 R/" Contra Costa County.Community Developmght Department Application&Permit Center 651 Pine Street,2"d F1007—North)h'ing Martinez, CA: 94553 (925)335=1381 ,\o���\ �\a�� `�k�,n� � E�te�T B ���� ����� ��n���° Conditions of Approval 20 A. NOTICE OF 90-DAY OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS PERMIT. This notice is intended to advise the applicant that pursuant to Government Code Section 66000, et seq., the applicant has the opportunity to protest fees, dedications, reservations, and/or exactions required as part of this project approval. The opportunity to protest is limited to a 90-day period after the project is approved. The ninety (90) day period in which you may protest the .amount of any fee or the imposition of any dedication, reservation, or other exaction required by this approved permit, begins on the date this permit was approved. To be valid, a protest must be in writing pursuant. to Government Code Section 66020 and delivered to the Community Development Department within 90 days of the approval date of this permit. B. 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. C. This project may be subject to the.requirements of the Department ofTish and Game. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources,per the Fish and Game Code. D. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to determine if a permit is required;and if it can be obtained. E. Comply with the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance requirements for the Bethel Island L� Area of Benefit and ECCRFFA (RTDIM) Area of Benefit as adopted'by the Board of Supervisors. These fees must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. F. The subject property is located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as designated on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The applicant should be aware of the requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program and the County Floodplain Management Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2000-33) as they pertain to future construction of any structures on this property. G. Portions of this project are located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as designated on the Federal Emergency Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The applicant should be aware of the requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program and the County Floodplain TO:CDt4TH Contra Costa County Public Works Delia Di 8ueren, Director j jig, Deputy Directors e F 3 P !11 E Il R. Mitch Avalon.Brian M.Balbas Stephen Kowalewskl•Patricia McNamee M e TO: Monish Sen, Associate Civil Engineer, Engineering Services DATE: August 26, 2008 FROM: Jenna Caldwell., Civil Engineer,Transportation Engineerin SUB3ECT: Traffic Impact Fees MESSAGE: This memo is i regards to the methodology Public Works uses in the determination of traffic impact fe is. For boat and l storage purposes, the traffic impact fee is based on the number of peak hour trips generated by the proposed use. It is County practice to charge at a rate of one (1) eak hour trip for each one-hundred (100) storage spots provided. This ratio is used re ardless of whether or not the storage spots are covered. For boat docks, the traffic impact fee is again based on the number of peak hour trips that are generated by the proposed use. It is County practice to charge at a rate of one (1) peak ho r trip per five (5) boat slips. tr, C N � 0 ]C:tr v G:\TransEng\AQB\FEE D.ETERMINATIQN\2008-08-26 Memo-M.Sen,doc 5 06 'Acaed1tW by the Ameircan Public Works Assodapon" 255 Glacier Drive Martinet,CA 94553-4825 I TEL;(925)313.2000•FAX: (925)313-2333 www.cccpublicworks.org i E�IBiT C ���P�� �o�a\\.� �1Unk Conditions of Approval 5 Payment of Any Supplemental Application Fees that are Due 3. This application is subject to an initial application fees of($37,530.00), which was paid with the application submittal, plus time and material costs if the. application review expenses exceed '100% of the initial fee. Any additional fee due must be paid within 60 days of the permit effective date or prior to use of the permit whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance plus five working days for file preparation. The applicant may obtain current costs .by contacting the project planner. If additional fees are owed; a bill will be sent.to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. 4. Compliance Report — At least 45 days prior to filing a final map or issuance of grading permit, which ever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a report on compliance with the conditions of approval with this permit for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The fee for this application is a deposit of$1,000 that is subject to time and materials costs. Should staff costs exceed the deposit;additional fees will be required. A. -Except for those conditions administered by the Public Works Department, the report shall list each condition followed by a description of what the applicant has provided as evidence of compliance with that condition. The report shall also indicate whether the applicant believes that he has done all the applicant is in a position to do to comply with the applicable condition. (A copy of the computer file containing the conditions of approval may be available; to try to obtain a copy, contact Current Planning at 335-1210.) B. Unless otherwise indicated, the applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the condition of this report prior to filing the final map. Lighting Control 5. All outdoor lighting associated with the proposed development shall be designed and located to minimize ambient light levels consistent with public safety standards. Area lighting shall be directed downward with no splay of lighting directed offsite. Outdoor lighting that is greater than ten feet high shall incorporate a cut-off shield that prevents the light source from being directly visible from areas offsite. No lighting shall blink, flash, or .be of unusual high intensity or brightness. Ten days prior to the request or issuance of building permits to install lighting on-site the applicant shall provide a lighting plan for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. r` V Conditions of Approval 6 Final Landscape Plan 6. Prior_to the issuance of building or grading,permits, the applicant shall submit a Final Landscape plan consisting of pest-resistant plants and plantings appropriate to site soil, climate, wind, and rain. In addition, the plans shall .be designed to minimize use of fertilization, irrigation and accommodate the anticipated runoff as shown in the preliminary approved Stormwater Control Plan dated February 7, 2006. The Final Landscape plans must be detailed and prepared by a certified and/.or licensed landscape architect or botanist and submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. 7. The Final Plan shall be designed in accordance with the landscape plan exhibit on sheets L1-5 of the development plans, the Stormwater Control Plan, and the Water Conservation Ordinance and shall be installed prior occupancy of any of the dry boat storage prefabricated metal buildings. Parking 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed paved parking spaces are 9 ft by 19ft in dimension, Handicapped spaces shall be appropriately identified and in compliance with ADA (American Disability Act), and a minimum of 10 spaces are provided to accommodate temporary vehicular parking for customers. Biological 9. Pre-construction surveys of all potential raptor nesting.habitat within 500 feet of .the project site shall occur within 30 days of ground disturbing activities/project construction. If occupied raptor nests are found within 250 feet of the proposed construction area,a protection zone shall be established around the nest,with. orange construction fencing and/or staking that shall remain until the juveniles have fledged and are independent of the nest. The width of raptor nest protection zones will be variable and established based on site specific conditions such as the individual raptors/species tolerance to activity and screening vegetation or topography. The protection zones will be established. by a qualified wildlife biologist. in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. No Construction or earth'moving activity.shall occur within the designated buffer until it is determined that the species have fledged or attain sufficient skills to avoid project zones. (MM Biology) NQ g1 ; t? GCCa S1 Y ig 27.2 � „C �t VA syF �s a� N V-" o GAG m I ♦f n! 'a a is ✓O N 9 y IS G •D N O Y ✓^1 � Z9 t L J r Y. LS of � ► 'ag '� �` it�gg v uj N 9 {t "tit N 7a oa o ar Ift n TO p � O C 4\ s 4'1 O D, i # x a R a m � o aA {�tOrp a 2 p t , r� u+'9 � ✓ � d+ A� 'moi �, � \l 0 ✓ v e dw � A w q 1 •a a p Q G p 7�iy'(yV�\ , L`:XX o N ` Y m A U � � t c� `1 ��a�,k \�kw�\,o�a��� PPW Contra Costa County. Julia R. ,�Public Works Deputy Direc orsren, Director 'A p !' R. Mitch Avalon•Brian M.Balbas D e p a r t m e n t Stephen Kowalewski•Patricia McNamee Memo TO: Lashun Cross, Senior Planner, Department of Conservation and Development DATE: August 14, 2008 FROM: Monish Sen, Associate Civil Engineer, Engineering Services Division SUBJECT: PERMIT LP 05-2026 RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (Riggs Enterprises Inc./Willow Road/Bethel Island/APN 030-110-006) FILE: LP 05-2026 On July 14, 2008, the East County Regional Planning Commission met to hear and decide on. the request for a,land use permit, rezone, and General Plan Amendment to expand the existing Sugar Barge Marina in Bethel Island for additional boat storage. However, there were several items that the Commission indicated that they would need additional information on prior to deciding on the matter. The item was continued to allow staff time to research and provide responses to their questions. We have provided the following responses to the items pertaining to the Public Works Department, including recommended additional Conditions of Approval: Road Improvements: • The Commissioners asked staff to review the previous conditions of approval specifically related to the Deferred Improvement Agreement (DIA) for improvements on Sugar Barge Road, discuss the reason that this entitlement is not triggering the requirement to install the improvements listed in the DIA, and determine legality or nexus to request DIA improvements as a result of the new proposal. Our Response: As a condition of approval for the Land Use Permit (LP 2013-96) authorizing the Sugar Barge Marina to be established on the parcels immediately to the east of the subject parcel, the owner/applicant entered into a Deferred Improvement Agreement (DIA) to construct a 32 foot wide paved roadway through a new curving alignment for Sugar Barge Road that would approximate the western and northern boundary of the subject parcels. The DIA also required installation of drainage facilities, street lights, conform paving, and payment of fees to review the improvement plans and inspection fees after installation of these improvements. 'Accredited by the American Public Works Association" 255 Glacier Drive Martinez,CA 94553-4825 TEL:(925)313-2000•FAX: (925)313-2333 www.cccpublicworks.org L. Cross August 14, 2008 Page 2 of 3 The construction of these improvements are specified to begin when any one of the following occurs; 1) the County Public Works Director determines that there is no further reason to defer construction of the improvements. because their construction is necessary for the public health, welfare, and safety and/or is necessary for the orderly development of the surrounding area, 2) Sugar Barge in constructed to its ultimate planned width by the County or by-an assessment district, or 3) Frontage improvements are constructed adjacent to the subject property. Sugar Barge Road is currently a private roadway. The County has no plans (or identified funding.source) to improve Sugar Barge Road to its ultimate planned width. Even if the current development were required to improve Sugar Barge Road to meet Public Road Standards along the project frontage and the DIA improvements were required to be completed prior to approval of this permit, the County would not accept the road as a Public Roadway. The roadway could not be accepted for public maintenance considering . that a significant portion of Sugar Barge Road between the subject parcel and Piper Road (to the west) is not constructed to public road standards and features no offers of dedication to the County. Therefore, unless the entire roadway was to be improved to public road standards and contained in an adequate public road right of way, the County would not accept ff as a Public Road. Considering that the County has.no plans for improving Sugar Barge Road to Public Road Standards, there is no nexus to construct the improvements identified in the DIA as a part of this permit. Potential oil spills on gravel parking surface: • The Commissioners requested more definition on the proposed gravel parking locations and the potential impacts from stored boats and RVs leaking oils.to the groundwater aquifer, in relation to Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) standards. Our Response: The applicant shall be required to meet provision C.3 of the Clean Water requirements, as established, by the RWQCB, which require the installation of storm water treatment features that are intended to remove pollutants prior to discharge into the area wide storm water conveyance systems. The preliminarily complete Stormwater Control Plan is subject to revision prior to the finaiStormwater Control Plan being.deemed compliant with the Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (County Code Section 1014). We recommend adding COA #50A and #50B, which will require the Fina/ Stormwater Control Plan to demonstrate that.the project will not impact drinking water quality for any nearby wells and provide any Best (or Integrated) Management Practices (BMP/IMP) necessary for this purpose. L. Cross August 14, 2008 Page 3 of 3 It should be noted that gravel surfacing is more permeable and therefore preferable over . impervious surfacing when considering pollutant removal. However, when analyzing potential impacts to groundwater quality, the Health Services Department or other regulatory agency may have additional comments. We recommend the following Conditions of Approval be added: 50A. Prior to approval, the final Stormwater Control Plan shall adequately demonstrate that the "non-traditional" Stormwater Management BMP features (such as CDS units, natural swales, ect.) proposed in the preliminary Stormwater Control Plan shall be shown to provide a degree of stormwater treatment compliant with the NPDES permit and/or equivalent to the degree of treatment provided by traditional BMPs designed and sized in accordance with the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. 506. 'The final Stormwater Control Plan shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Health Services Department (Environmental Health Division) or other appropriate regulatory agency, that this development will not significantly impact water quality in nearby drinking wells. MS: G:\EngSvc\Land Dev\LP\LP 05-2026\Response to Planning Commission.docx cc: G. Huisingh,Engineering Services S.Gospodchikov,Engineering Services D.Swartz,Flood Control R..Drake, Department of Conservation and Development Riggs Enterprises Inc. Attn: David Riggs P.O. Box 1440 Bethel Island,CA 94511 �Q�``� �,ea�� ��,��` EXHIBIT 6 Notification List David Riggs Darryl Alexander, PLS Sugar Barge Marina &Resort P.O. Box 1440 Alexander& Assoc., Inc. 1440 Sugar Barge Rd. Bethel Island CA 94511 147 Old Bernal Ave., Ste. 10 Bethel Island CA 94511 ' Pleasanton, CA 94566 ' Interoffice Interoffice Interoffice Main Library Public Works Public Works Pleasant Hill Conservation/Flood Control Engineering Ironhorse Sanitary District Interoffice P.O. Box 1105 East County Fire District Environmental Health 450 Walnut Meadows Drive 134 Oak Street Oakley, CA 94561 Brentwood, CA 94513 Water Distribution Planning B1MID Division Delta Protection Commission 3085 Stone Road EBMUD Mailstop 701 P.O. Box 530 375 111 St. Walnut Grove, CA 95690 P.O. Box 244 Oakland, CA 94607-1055 Bethel Island; CA 94511 City of Oakley City of Brentwood Bethel Island MAC 3231 Main Street 708 Third Street P.O. Box 1388 Oakley, CA 94561 Brentwood, CA 94513 Bethel Island, Ca 94511 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Contra Costa Fire Protection District Division of Ecological Services 2010 Geary Road 2800 Cottage Way#W2605 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Sacramento, CA 95825-1888 30070001 30070002 30070003 GENNRICH JOHN ARTHUR QUINTANA RICHARD&MARIA E GENNRICH JOHN ARTHUR 16 CAMEO CT PO BOX 726 16 CAMEO CT WALNUT CREEK CA SAN BRUNO CA WALNUT CREEK CA 94597 94066 94597 30070004 30070005 30080003 ARIAS GEORGE JR& SONDRA K JONES OLGA ROSE TRE KENT JEREMIAH R PO BOX 1840 PO BOX 1292 PO BOX 648 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080004 30080005 30080006 MCELVAIN GEORGE& SANDRA L SOUTHER PHILLIP R MILBURN GERALD A PO BOX 328 PO BOX 1067 PO BOX 316 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080007 30080010 30080011 DELANO DAVID J&SANDRA K BISHOP JACK L&CAROL W TRE ANDERSON DAVID E &MICHELLE PO BOX 2169 PO BOX 267 PO BOX 1534 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080012 30080013 30080014 ZAUNER JOHN C &CLEOPHA S BURE TERRYL K TRE NEWTON HERSHEL&E BERNICE TRE 1290 ST MARK CT PO BOX 495 PO BOX 2077 LOS ALTOS CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94024 94511 94511 30080015 30080016 30080017 NEWTON MARIVN T&DELORES TRE BOLLS TED JR&CATHY A LAUGHLIN MAXTON A PO BOX 128 2008 LARRY PL 4315 WILLOW RD BETHEL ISLAND CA LIVERMORE CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94550 94511 30080018 30080019 30080020 THIEMAN HARVEY C TRE GOODSON BRUCE EDLING THEODORE L&HELEN M PO BOX 898 746 ASBURY PL PO BOX 593 BETHEL ISLAND CA SANTA CLARA CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 95051 94511 30080021 30080022 30080023 SELBY RUDY&CLARA W KINZIE KIM KINZIE KIM PO BOX 71 1133 DELNO ST 1133 DELNO ST BETHEL ISLAND CA SAN JOSE CA SAN JOSE CA 94511 95126 95126 30080024 30080026 30080027 LANGER WILLIAM JR NELSON SCOTT D TRE FISHER DAVID A TRE 5294 DENT AVE PO BOX 1069 PO BOX 37 SAN JOSE CA BETHEL ISLAND CA DIABLO CA 95118 94511. 94528 30080028 30080029 30080059 NORTHAM TODD SIPES JASPER J &'ANNA R TRUST. BERGEVIN NED H &DORIS J PO BOX 1244 PO BOX 85 PO BOX 56 BETHELISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHELISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080060 30080062 30100001 BRIGHT FAMILY PRESERVATION TR BRIGHT FAMILY PRESERVATION TR RUSSO JOANNA H TRE 3124 LONGVIEW RD 3124 LONGVIEW RD 487 BOX 457 ANTIOCH CA ANTIOCH CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94509 94509 94511 30100002 30110002 30110003 HEREDIA IRENE ANDERSON DORCIA A LIBERTY FEDERAL SERVICE CORP 404 GRANGNELLI AVE 3630 35TH AVE 2270 DOUGLAS BLVD#220 ANTIOCH CA OAKLAND CA ROSEVILLE CA 94509 94619 95661 30110004 30110006 30110007 BEAUCHAMP MICHAEL J&SANDRA RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC L PO BOX 1440 PO BOX 1440 PO BOX 260 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 . 94511 30120001 30120003 30120004 CAMPOS PABLO&OFELIA ANTHONY STELLA K MORRISON CRAIG&YVONNE 608 CIVIC CENTER 5649 NEWBURY WAY 4645 WILSON LN RICHMOND CA CARMICHAEL CA CONCORD CA 94804 95608 94521 30120017 30120031 RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC CAMPOS PABLO&OFELIA 0 PO BOX 1440 608 CIVIC CENTER ST 0 BETHEL ISLAND CA RICHMOND CA 94511 94804 EXHIBIT 7 Maps and Plans ® - j t r� ANW rq ,1 it + - /�r J '� .�� .7•,`I h� '�1.�� \✓/ "r �V% } s q al � 4 � 0 Vis% `a �- :. •�� .1��� :(�'���; K<� Iw 66 aysa...- � f t ► 4 ' ,9 >, Oil MCI Legend —1 Site Sugar Barge Marina Parcels M \ r \ \4 '�• \ h 54 JDDpppppppQODpp� -�' o o a 1� �o ® off �� + DOO�0000°p�.v000y� Rd g 9p g. • �,,.._• poo loom INS NONE �� ' ��pOO�oopO • • O o � nounuoa0000D . oo� _ 3 �umn 0 1 /$ 4 6 1 � O V' 1 � � Nr ro 4 m� 'rOs ooti iJ 1 `V. 00 �1 4� 1 �. N f O 1 1= , 0 1 'Z a D A g O Z �n � 5uoisV3a 31Yp is ON - 3WDS ON tou-st-n 1w-ena(m)YMOArma 'MaLvwm,aYfl7tf]£�L. s -Ard/Y�?[Y`1%=V o7o df7 `CJS .L.Nnoa VIS03 V2IIN03 31m �DIVI SIVIL YIiJORE QHvqSl Z`��.T.ag l-4JC£l96 6z11GIrfd �IA Q3NJ3NJ -7 iY9a VXV7 :AB 03N'J1530 HOMIs xua - vNIUN Houva uvf)ns �IJQ+j��b :ON XSIB �j e is sziv as v SHION ££ls6 M NNYMO 3 1O3 WOO i N J z th B_> t �� Q �w � o3�3I5163a�5�T I o , '3 F \ Lit a w C� ZLiu ca W S w rn ��y= _z w a 4 i g r `I FL=} WW tO _5 �d . Kj •' 11 t 4 G �z) z a to k O w < 4 arrsz . 0D1° kt j U O 2 p7 4 1 O U =U O O ym�qn� W so �W ao }Z3 ,i.� s U O U Udp Wglu 4Qr.. WO UU OJm Z oz U2<2w G yp C 4G SWi2 Owggq � U S 'Z-� O F3 z gwog nzo ym ° °op <° mwgc zzzD mm k q aS"w az azT pp p 00 Rau {{..fi�r LL,, o ZQ a a z �„ �i J a �S'' a >>a 1. a �� I.4.wlO�F±�[ {1.�}�y � �Y}l W04.LLLLGN �r.- N6'Z NVIND aTU VqW n�w1TT1��� �Z au �`a W= F-1 OOOW W 000 �y#�LL� 3NU0 ZOC� QN'WOv O� w<Wx130 mooZ.Zz2.�m}g-�OOOOwtGztz 0m iL p_.WgW_�N �ntW� WO U a°a°oa Saa�na�aalnGGGlp'nu7G<ava-iGk'�f-"al-G333Gut.'za Opola..�rc� "o w3Xy E o oD aaa zw wa ou a r.n p+nc' 24z+ S'Y' 0"��2-'eS�d p py2 Qca c0 k3 3 an UUaa�a gvl�N yy mu�vlp o 33� .ahi':�c�,.gWzq�- W OS W ~° UA..ti \ yaG p3W mU}F MR.. O ql- Ca0001n u1mG i.Lxi�r�r Fy<< \\\.� y$ wee $ y $oaglz a po D 3 2c? WW3� WkOzyi412 �� � OW W 4m GOOr¢ �ja rcZ = NN c�3ec°,G�So�D��'ciDSm lvti vau " a �U� ��?U 06 31�., D �i�uW� z mw °a s < xDymwm¢L�m aCa�iSzgx - wp� � 5� a '0 ZK a O Uy�jOUW�OH U W Du}(� 2 q� W O •� w n < m wammmc'i ucDiUooD' wwwc'c cq.cc =x�a`z.Y5.�5o`G.j Sy��O � w a m c'atuuucoiv oa�owwwZiw��l=.wu moG z yyycy�wa 4� � I Ug�zj U �tU U 4N CL 44 CW=Z���Oj�` r� LLii UU Wtk J Wm U �U vt y� 24 j! .9 OO W y 4 ��Wuu 4 3 O i,$y � 04o U� Uw DO �y41W+1 o Nogd {r� �V o P7 �V Zz �v1,�W�Y Upy �rWm�ryyyyJ4(y -1Wwm F_ WW} W �,qj W d '20 y<j�0. y�'s °�WN't �a W~ �.i u1jl 4J� �2xs4 tW.M1��i 3 Stk 4a 20O p \J I. a� �$ iYi � aa` � zam �W a h ° �a a}� 111 LLL is 3 4�mW wg„ m h < 3 w < 4 y Way 3 W2ap t o 084zW. 443 pUQtl 1..23 O 40 p '2m yx, a0 ,cc_ 3sizya.,.�q� }W}<W3 Olu y9UW,O W44 g„}V-H cxigQ Viz mmC a5 1 1 n 1 �nd4mnH UWWa z�ppx � r mog ° zuWz92 yyy�W < gOMW41� 2Ix4 is Wm00 -yy 31.W Ww $0y:�WQZpZ yO� WU -1W ° 1 1 4p��0O`�jp� ®r. 2 vwiaOQZ Vx�hy m 2 Op Wi.`��aJtYyyy`�0y�p` �z� oWlm" 41 2pi p.21� > W 4 WU yUZVp GWw9A �hGOUW4.1'2 C'.i64 h04i Wy�2ci Up 'Za &.' 3=� 2 V{K �U ytr Ty SOS z �3ua�m a8 qua �z2a C3waw u a3 3i o oa a 8 _ qp� d h h4 4Qt,� Z 4+ y W U4 Ll wR vy O �,,. w w b°j 2qn o ��gWu 11 aaZm° 7 "' m2 w,ww u >W4W ow4 W a °11`" ozWkGw> f„" o ya ��4flw 8 aW � Axax 9mo � ° o yr U .W c� oai g 6z W �4 41 Z4'�W � �1:�.1� ,WW-+WS W 2� Wh�pgCW3 c} p m 4zt�p OW 01S 020U 4 ri�� z3y4 az 20 i Z{cy W� SgV$x�gm1. 11���240a'* .1 y W K Cw0pU41pQa 4Y tttt 0? Qgpyz$t 4.U� A2y pp O*�+F2Q4zC2M 44UaDWrqUdd2� ^viO yy '-I 1 x O U U U °G 0 W�n 03LL2� €D 3C WN q Uy�4<��� R 3 v0 0�il °2 034 ao Wp = gkgaw(a 2a �3W 8 �< 1`2Sc mV ��� �G WG$c4i ° `t m zaaa a °A H O OW o P3yvm< Y� H4 mO4Uj z� O m°Uw U OW < 1� zz s qtiw2 W4 W a <mGGii Oy�3 {u42 za< p 2 �I�e U (}t� R2 ?? W �33 WyV,t �gl`�L 04 4`D po<m UpoJD Ey}y�' y2 Y�N W47�Iri W 2ti C�pj �U� U xWU�.�iW<p 20.�z1 W4,r, Q 1<, �OY WV��iq OS �W gzp3 4204 S0 �pP g24h, H 22O 2C NW 32� m<g y Ot0.f K��W 0y 0 W aCWj 00 U334 y WW Ui 2 `>: UR€I<i zWj y0 2 2 U U 7 j O 4 \ UWP g 3z 3 �� k+2 p4o2 0 pyru �v{ y W y2 72 4kw 30 0.2 0 W2 WtiNfyzUZ�y p lm 30 y l-ooaar� 4 W}}..WO{y�{ y� W 4 WC Hk� (��iyf W m x xi J <x0 2 m �W�LT ��� ���G yQppZ���u J � 4" ��O �s y W pW yJt' h.s ml O D. UBVV [�$�4 U U y�44CV23L�4 UOk m2..i= mgl U g IR, zC�iV vai u $'02 3m3 � a �aotxi, o o � u `"1'n P$ �o as� 4�upwzuW4° W �doj 3� k cWu .p ° ��owz au <y �� a� 8�g�w4Q4,%2 Ggi yyN m� }}� y2 a4y=U��pp o 2m� 4 8, x g°off 8- o�wi 'ZH �I'f�F<i F a0 04 U C1 3 Q� 30 7Z.zz mn°�4Y �< Zi qY2 4i W mUQ<4h0 GyO � �Wti Md. F" pU < ' «Y y�l As o(r DDBg-ans(yg)►aarartlrJ Nq�ns►s'ia or". VGI17,� XUaR -IF 7/AMVazo s)t .09-.I �t1tl saj�'I�OSS :3>�5 333N0 NIlOo LSoo vzuxoa Booz-st-zy` oaO 79{�2to.LS �Ii3Q xVISI 03Nar5g jlY1S yp�T e�- iT�a ln, ' -aV1a�rl'Y LL'��ci qg a YTr nO :'ON 31U \ inn nrvra acv ra outavas5,a z fCi86 i Neel# i 1 !•� ,._ W ... _ ... .. f St6I f�St QV09,408VS MOS., «. , satt , • _ <: ( `�`' t Ep q e �.b �•esy` �T ��,\ ,TT _"' d `l ,.. t n � t - s ..-.. �• ,�.' �' - ... d (�' ,``� ., is lz lZI Of < 1*h. _ � •, .61k ��\�sy��6Y�b' � ..T t� �•ir.' ,�W� ty4 ti ' �_ �•r r _ .may ?ry l.�.. 1 / ,.. ,_ rpt, y �;,?:- •'_. , �i .u_ .,:.. O� �7 ,._ fry u,., a:•, - 9 _ $$ $ $ All td1 `SNa U y 7 a a „K aayN 4 '" Ate& R -L z- = a $$3' $3''3 `&$a $$' Em'ar m LJ w SNOIsl43tl 31Ya As I a+ ,DD4=-1 90—Si—at RM-MV(sae) �rrlYa+= 'M4LMPVVZ7d or>cUZIS se/V'�7►x[W azo err 31Y S u,ai'd'ISI 'Immo 'avoa anuva HYnnS :3+ra bYIDNM.f +>�LYI S �L YIJI/S+.'� V :AB a3N)3n0 Dt+OCfl96 vxltn�t 3n2IVH 2iVnns � :'a+ 113 azrcusexns ;euvamVXV7 °a ''nvuOls ma — vNiuvI4i af)uV$ avOIIS 'roadlNS-GS:dsia uB 03Na53a °a fmcl MUS CCt96 = A6 NmWtl 3KV74 103ro d :'aN flfll` Y 6 � � _@ l'`" _ -.WN•.:, b try t ca O 400.2 ., s `.J:S ice\ tib..- - A.:z° "."y _ __ _ �Otr Y�NY&'•t[Y9!?S ig OA ^ 39 +Q _ O � •F t6C f 6 _� - :'�^�� � fib.• d N z o � b Qa. _, �_ -' -- p................... ;,� +„_ ,�: _ .,G'y '.,. 'o' o. `� s.� _ Nay.• ~�s- - _ s� _ .. �, ��� .:� �." 'G,'' - _�` _`may � � p .9 �1 � ©,�� -• � ,�a .i _ �, _ _ .�, ' �ER µ� yip' E3 il _ - .. _ _ ,� o OE05p, cr C `x t� \ ,• 3 iNOi5Lt3N 31ya AB 'ON PNMQNS sy }ooz-St-zi ow-a"(a8E) nWamrr A%UNTgPW f 'Or sans Yd►7P?Jm azo L:r 3lV3s AINnoo v1soo vumoo -kva /ry//j`II MOSS V va GN"SI limusa b-a�£Ct98 bid •!./13Li S��I IIJ OSSAa 03NO3H] i7 :'ON 3'll! d s -V ujaArVX97 SURVAaaw 08 HOvsoIs xua - vNTxv�rt Hoxvg tn� ns t5 = �.. AB tl3NO153a 'ON NSIO �ja15 MUMS m96 = :As NM1Ma 3Y(VN 133r'Okid ",NEER*K y t a 03 U U ZY ' 0 '1Pti 8 b'�1s i 03n*5 n z , a N k i _k S n k 1 k w k I N k 4 N y {qQ WX CQ r n k x is ; eg N U � L. ��0 41 Nb� i<rf1 tv k n � k is N O k X11 � 41 k� k U7 <odO k ''[ NbVF �1 f u SAO ai"v.3tl 3140 AS 'On szmwmr ,�.�-I �,r y� r vro<sr st4as X.LhIfl00 V,LS00 >aoz-si-zi — SYMOM Sgj YjjOSiJ as oo r4 vaj'N00 sw >•e,..�_ �n��� ? 'AO 03H33H3 (lNY ISI laaTag 3tv0 ^'''�`��ID GXl �'�l °a 3f} iOS,S .rI2TQ iL4 'AB o3ifOt530 ••• 11Y1Q� t1M4 YQ `ON 31t) �.,) �JIiS Z e mm4tla IV'Id 7091moj NOISOUa Hsos rr'oN njo .'ON 6h �} Ja31ONd = �N 60r rn 1 �oil p Q �' � '4� a$ 8y� C� � •• �� •� � ��56 � sS� 2 Q2 �� W ✓t senaoauaaauoa axiasay p' $� J o mme �g Ila! a Ok � � ��t�� � 8�� 4�11 1 ������kg O��� � �g ��g e� .� � f ' lot L � - V11 a 4!i91.E � ,� QIg � . 111 is I I Ilk fill Ifift OR Ifill 1199! IN 511 Oki VIVO 14111 Ull OR, _ o _ — — — s.- c, 01 7 r, r W , a: y y�-._._�____ ,.. ` 3`YG$J//"IJ � ,.� ., z ,� ._•t--s`:u 4a �.. .... t ..,. _ 6M 1 JRW iL 565 � c x F; # 5pai u ui vi' z W nnn g y o,o .gig" M2 &� N <-'at<H� NEW; 0,3�3 w o F z I mpo io In a Z. N aw c9 I z NE Hm z JXZ. > •a Z J w= Z J Or1aN o l-- o °Q z a X o2z O � z 0 I- 266 I C iIiIIiIIi iiiI f..•.:x. 1nG.._3 d07 .. ^' ,�I_.-_s.NnmI_5:OmIN nIII_>_1—,I^n_r J—_II-.n9i\yof l oeY�a -_'.i_.z�.Q_g�._H ax�m$N.Z.9-aW..LV^—pIIIIUIII III IIIoIIoIII IlII fi Z NnJorI j hm � OwZ, — O smoNJm im—9gNNo .m\ Ql Z mwg 1ItJ'¢ "I n �IaNW— L w .— o w O N Q „ z Zz p © ooWO O O z M U CC U W m w wz © O O— U_c i° _ ° p{m-n .3•rar i�oon\o �❑O.z Z/l 1-,9Z=z/l L-.909 91 3 �O9 Z- .Oz gm .OZ— UaSI O w Uz o0 io0 a z0 am m�z 0 .,0 ZgOjF OO ow O ao Z m Z< mO Ir w °O wW w j. .9l J 00 (n O u!Q� a W Nitimoo l vm ON3 LL U) LL-t, o x9fx9170 OY Um 9_tes w o :fl.,(dLi) B UNI WZ 337 IxSf9l z >OJo� ) OO UL OxN Ag co jVWQ C < c. z 11 m n m U p o c a ti �_� ,.=mss .ter r�rr.\ <, ..,.�, �..-..,. .>. .�. -,. .' ,_ .. .\;: ..g�, ti,3 y...�, ._,.. >���, •-:�.5,_.e4J —1>�.,k. .r.';} J BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA.COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING IN THE MATTER OF Hearing on a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning in support of the Sugar Barge Marina and Resort Expansion(County Files: GP#04-0001 and RZ#063187) Notice of hearing for Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 10:45 a.m, was mailed this day, Wedsday, November 5, 2008. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned have been, a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited for mailing by the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, first class postage fully prepaid, a copy of the hearing notice, on the above entitled matter to the following: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LIST I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, at Martinez, California. Dated: Jane Penni n on, Chief Clerk NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS BETHEL ISLAND AREA Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 10:45 a.m., in the County Administration Building, Board Chambers, 651 Pine Street(Corner of Pine and Escobar Streets), Martinez, California,the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will conduct a public hearing to consider the following planning matter: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING IN SUPPORT OF THE SUGAR BARGE MARINA AND RESORT EXPANSION, (County Files: GP#04-0001 AND RZ9063187). The proposed General Plan Amendment involves a change to the General Plan Land Use Element Map land use designation for the 38-acre site (APN: 030-110-006) on Bethel Island from SL, Single Family-Low Density to CR, Commercial Recreation also the proposed Rezoning would involve a change to the zoning designation for a 38- acre site from A-2, General Agricultural District to R-B, Retail Business District in support of the construction of boat storage facilities and an outdoor recreational vehicle'and boat.storage area. The East County Regional Planning Commission approved Land Use Permit #05-2026 on September 8, 2008, contingent upon thei approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning. The location of the project,is within the unincorporated Bethel Island territory of Contra Costa County, State of California, south of Willow Road and north of Sugar Barge Road. For the purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. If you challenge this matter in Court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in the notice, or in written correspondence. Prior to the hearing, Department of Conservation and Development staff will be available on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 105, Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA, to ineet with any interested persons 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) if necessary, provide an opportunity to identify, resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff, please call Lashun Cross, Department of Conservation and Development, at(925) 335-1229 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday,November 17, 2008 to confirm your participation. Date: November 5, 2008 David Twa, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator r B -; David Riggs Darryl Alexander, PLS Sugar Barge Marina & Resort P.O. Box 1440 Alexander& Assoc., Inc. 1440 Sugar Barge Rd. Bethel Island CA 94511 147 Old Bernal Ave., Ste. 10 Bethel Island CA 94511 ' Pleasanton, CA 94566 ' Interoffice Interoffice Interoffice Main Library Public Works Public Works Pleasant Hill Conservation/Flood Control Engineering Ironhorse Sanitary District East County Fire District Interoffice P.O. Box 1105 134 Oak Street Environmental Health 450 Walnut Meadows Drive Oakley, CA 94561 Brentwood, CA 94513 Water Distribution Planning BIMID Division Delta Protection Commission 3085 Stone Road EBMUD Mailstop 701 P.O. Box 530 244 375 11th St. Walnut Grove, CA 95690 P.O. Box Oakland, CA 94607-1055' Bethel Island, CAA 94511 J ' f City of Oakley City of Brentwood Bethel Island MAC 3231 Main Street 708 Third Street P.O. Box 1388 Oakley, CA 94561 Brentwood, CA 94513 Bethel Island, Ca 94511 U.S. Fish &.Wildlife Service Contra Costa Fire Protection District Division of Ecological,Services 2010 Geary Road 2800 Cottage Way#W2605 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Sacramento, CA 95825-1888 30070001 30070002 30070003 GENNRICH JOHN ARTHUR QUINTANA RICHARD&MARIA E GENNRICH JOHN ARTHUR 16 CAMEO CT PO BOX 726 16 CAMEO CT WALNUT CREEK CA SAN BRUNO CA WALNUT CREEK CA 94597 94066 94597 30070004 30070005 30080003 ARIAS GEORGE JR& SONDRA K JONES OLGA ROSE TRE KENT JEREMIAH R PO BOX.1840 PO BOX 1292 PO BOX 648 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080004 30080005 30080006 MCELVAIN GEORGE&SANDRA L SOUTHER PHILLIP R MILBURN GERALD A PO BOX 328 PO BOX 1067 PO BOX 316 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080007 30080010 30080011 DELANO DAVID J&SANDRA K BISHOP JACK L&CAROL W TRE ANDERSON DAVID E&MICHELLE PO BOX 2169 PO BOX 267 PO BOX 1534 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080012 30080013 30080014 ZAUNER JOHN C&CLEOPHA S BURE TERRYL K TRE NEWTON HERSHEL&E BERNICE TRE 1290 ST MARK CT PO BOX 495 PO BOX 2077 LOS ALTOS CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94024 94511 94511 30080015` 30080016 30080017 NEWTON MARIVN T&DELORES TRE BOLLS TED JR&CATHY A LAUGHLIN MAXTON A PO BOX 128 2008 LARRY PL 4315 WILLOW RD BETHEL ISLAND CA LIVERMORE CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94550 94511 30080018 30080019 30080020 THIEMAN HARVEY C TRE GOODSON BRUCE EDLING THEODORE L&HELEN M PO BOX 898 746 ASBURY PL PO BOX 593 BETHEL ISLAND CA SANTA CLARA CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 95051 94511 30080021 30080022 30080023 SELBY RUDY&CLARA W KINZIE KIM KINZIE KIM PO BOX 71 1133 DELNO ST 1133 DELNO ST BETHEL ISLAND CA SAN JOSE CA SAN JOSE CA 94511 95126 95126 30080024 30080026 30080027 LANGER WILLIAM JR NELSON SCOTT D TRE FISHER DAVID A TRE 5294 DENT AVE PO BOX 1069 PO BOX 37 SAN JOSE CA BETHEL ISLAND CA DIABLO CA 95118 94511 94528 .30080028 30080029 30080059 NORTHAM TODD SIPES JASPER J &ANNA R TRUST BERGEVIN NED H&DORIS J PO BOX 1244 PO BOX 85 PO BOX 56 BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30080060 30080062 30100001 BRIGHT FAMILY PRESERVATION TR BRIGHT FAMILY PRESERVATION TR RUSSO JOANNA H TRE 3124 LONGVIEW RD 3124 LONGVIEW RD 487 BOX 457 ANTIOCH CA ANTIOCH CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94509 94509 94511 30100002 30110002 30110003 HEREDIA IRENE ANDERSON DORCIA A LIBERTY FEDERAL SERVICE CORP 404 GRANGNELLI AVE 3630 35TH AVE 2270 DOUGLAS BLVD#220 ANTIOCH CA OAKLAND CA ROSEVILLE CA 94509 94619 95661 30110004 30110006 30110007 BEAUCHAMP MICHAEL J&SANDRA RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC L PO BOX 1440 PO BOX 1440 PO BOX 260• BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA BETHEL ISLAND CA 94511 94511 94511 30120001 30120003 30120004 CAMPOS PABLO &OFELIA ANTHONY STELLA K MORRISON CRAIG&YVONNE 608 CIVIC CENTER 5649 NEWBURY WAY 4645 WILSON LN RICHMOND CA CARMICHAEL CA CONCORD CA 94804 95608 94521 30120017 30120031 RIGGS ENTERPRISES INC CAMPOS PABLO&OFELIA 0 PO BOX 1440 608 CIVIC CENTER ST 0 BETHEL ISLAND CA RICHMOND CA 94511 94804