HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07101990 - 2.3 2'3C',
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
Adopted this Order on July 10, 1990, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors/Commissioners Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Fanden
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RESOLUTION NO. 90/447 &
RA 90-7
SUBJECT: A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA CERTIFYING REVIEW AND
CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
MAKING FINDINGS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, AND STATING OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN
THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THE RODEO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra
Costa (the "Board") is considering adoption of a Redevelopment
Plan for the Rodeo Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment
Plan") ; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the
Redevelopment Plan was prepared by the County of Contra Costa
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et. sea. , hereafter "CEQA") , the
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et.
sea. , hereafter the "State EIR Guidelines") and the County's Local
Guidelines for Implementing CEQA (the "Local Guidelines") ; and
WHEREAS, On March 9, 1990, the County forwarded the Draft EIR
to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those agencies
which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Rodeo
Redevelopment Project (the "Project") , to all affected taxing
agencies pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 33333 . 3, and to
other interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of
such persons and agencies; and
WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies of the
completion of the Draft EIR was published in the West County Times
on April 13 , 1990; and
WHEREAS, by resolution adopted on May 22, 1990, the Contra
Costa County Planning Commission recommended to the Board and the
Agency the certification of the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, a joint public hearing was held by the Board and the
Agency on June 19, 1990 on the Redevelopment Plan and Final EIR,
following notice duly and regularly given as required by law, and
all interested persons expressing a desire to comment thereon or
object thereto were heard, and the Final EIR was considered; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR (dated
March, 1990) , the Final EIR incorporating comments and written
responses thereto (dated May, 1990) , and any additional comments
received at the joint public hearing together with the Board and
the Agency responses to those comments set forth in the record of
the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, by this concurrent resolution, the Board, as the
lead agency under CEQA for preparing the Final EIR and the entity
responsible for adopting the Redevelopment Plan and approving the
90/447 & RA 90-7
Project; and the Agency, as the agency responsible for preparing
and carrying out the Redevelopment Plan under California Community
Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et. sea. ) ,
jointly desire to comply with the requirements of CEQA, the State
EIR Guidelines, and the Local Guidelines for consideration,
certification, and use of the Final EIR by lead and responsible
agencies in connection with the approval and subsequent
implementation of the Redevelopment Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board and the Agency
hereby find and certify that the Final EIR has been completed in
compliance with CEQA and the State EIR guidelines; that the Final
EIR adequately addresses the environmental issues of the Project
and the Redevelopment Plan; and that the Board and the Agency have
reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR
prior to approving the Redevelopment Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board and the Agency hereby
identify the significant effects, adopt the mitigation measures,
adopt the monitoring program to be implemented for each mitigation
measure, make the findings, and declare the statement of
overriding considerations set forth in detail in the attached
Exhibit A which is incorporated in this Resolution by this
reference. The statements, findings and determinations set forth
in Exhibit A are based on the above certified Final EIR and other
information available to the Board and the Agency, and are made in
compliance with Sections 15091, 15092 , and 15093 of the State EIR
Guidelines and Section 21081. 6 of CEQA.
1 ttereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
ra47/rda.res an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Boardof Supe ors n the date shown.
cc: Redevelopment Agency ATTESTED:
PHIL BA CHEL R,Clerk of the Board
IUP,,
rviso and Coun TmInIstrator
0
BY ,DeDUty
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
RedevelopmenSen on the date shown.
ATTESTED: A In L.16_.
Mq7IT ELOR A envy Secretary
a
By Deputy
90/447 & RA 90-7
• 1
EXHIBIT A
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
RODEO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, FINDINGS OF FACT,
MONITORING PLAN, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
I. General Information and Description of the Project
The project under consideration by the Board of Supervisors
of the County of Contra Costa ("Board") and the Contra Costa
County Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") is the Redevelopment Plan
for the Rodeo Redevelopment Project (the "Project") . The
Redevelopment Plan has been prepared pursuant to the California
Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33.000
et. seq. ) to enable the County of Contra Costa ("County") and the
Agency to eliminate the physical, economic and social blighting
conditions that currently exist in the Rodeo Redevelopment
Project Area ("Project Area") so that the Project Area may be
developed in conformance with the Contra Costa County General
Plan to the benefit of Project Area residents and businesses and
the community as a whole.
An Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Redevelopment
Plan has been prepared by the Agency in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") , the State CEQA
Guidelines and applicable local CEQA Implementation Guidelines.
The County has served as "Lead Agency" and the Agency has served
as a "Responsible Agency" in the preparation and consideration of
the EIR.
The process began on October 26, 1989 with the preparation
of the Initial Study and the mailing of a Notice of Preparation
to all interested and affected agencies, followed by the
preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (the "DEIR") .
The DEIR was submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review
on March 91 1990 (SCH #89030083) . The 45-day comment period
closed on May 1, 1990. On March 9 , 1990, the Notice of
Completion of the DEIR was published in the West County Times.
Pursuant to Health and Safety Section 33333 . 3, the DEIR and
the Redevelopment Plan were distributed by certified mail, return
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -1-
C <«
receipt requested, to all affected taxing agencies and the fiscal
review committee. Copies of the Notice of Completion of the DEIR
were also mailed to the County's mailing list of interested
persons regarding environmental issues. The Contra Costa County
Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on the
DEIR on April 24 , 1990.
Twelve written comments were received and 8 people spoke at
the Planning Commission public hearing on the DEIR. The comments
received on the DEIR, the County' s responses to such comments,
and a comprehensive summary of the EIR are contained in the Final
Environmental Impact Report (the "FEIR") , which document is
incorporated herein by this reference.
At its meeting on June 12, 1990, the Planning Commission
recommended that the Board and Agency certify the FEIR and that
the Board adopt the Redevelopment Plan.
The Redevelopment Plan and the FEIR for the Redevelopment
Plan came before the Board and the Agency on June 19, 1990. On
July 10, 1990, the Board and the Agency certified the EIR for the
Redevelopment Plan and adopted the following Findings, Monitoring
Plan, and Statement of .Overriding Considerations.
II. The Record
The record of the Board and the Agency relating to the
Redevelopment Plan and its potential environmental effects
includes:
A. The Preliminary Redevelopment Plan;
B. The Redevelopment Plan for the Rodeo Redevelopment
Project;
C. The Report on the Redevelopment Plan for the Rodeo
Redevelopment Project ("Report on the Plan") ;
D. Documentary and oral evidence received by the Contra
Costa County Planning Commission, the Agency and the Board during
public hearings on the Redevelopment Plan and the EIR for the.
Redevelopment Plan and the Agency's response to written evidence
received before and at the public hearings;
E. The Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") prepared
for the Redevelopment Plan, consisting of the DEIR, the comments
on the DEIR, and the County' s responses to such comments;
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -2-
F. The Written Findings and Responses Pursuant to Health
and Safety Code Section 33363, adopted by the Board on July 10,
1990'; and
G. Matters of common knowledge to the Board and the Agency
which they consider, such as the Contra Costa County General Plan
(the "General Plan") , the Rodeo Area General Plan and the zoning
ordinance.
III. Significant Environmental Effects
The FEIR for the Redevelopment Plan, certified by the Board
and Agency, identified 31 potentially significant environmental
effects attributed in part to the Redevelopment Plan. These
potentially significant environmental effects, as well as
proposed mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Parts II
and III of the FEIR, and the responses to comments on the DEIR,
and summarized on pages 7 through 22 of the FEIR.
Each potentially significant environmental effect identified
in the FEIR, the proposed mitigation measures and corresponding
monitoring program for that effect, and the Board's and Agency's
findings with regard to that effect are discussed in Section IV
below.
IV. Findings and Monitoring Program
Notwithstanding the. identification of the significant
environmental effects of the Redevelopment Plan, the Board and
the Agency have approved the Redevelopment Plan, as authorized by
Public Resources Code Section 21081 and 14 California Code of
Regulations Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 . As required by the
aforementioned references, the following findings are made for
whichthereis substantial evidence in the record. Further, as
required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081. 6, a
monitoring program is adopted for each mitigation measure adopted
by the Board and Agency.
A. Land Use Impacts
1. Land Use Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. In some
instances, project-assisted commercial and multiple-family
development could introduce significant new land use conflicts
with existing residential development (noise, parking conflicts,
etc. ) .
32000£.PSO
06/01/90 -3-
b. Mitigation. Review procedures prior to
provision of Agency assistance, and the conditions placed on any
assistance, should include assurances of adequate separation,
scale transition, noise buffering, adequate parking, etc.
C. Monitoring Program. As a condition to
approval of any development in the Project Area, the Agency and
the County shall require that adequate buffering between
incompatible uses is provided for.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.A. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in A. l.a. above.
2 . Land Use Impact 2
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Future
development of the vacant Unocal-owned "buffer" area between the
Unocal Refinery and the Bayo Vista residential complex could
result in significant land use incompatibility impacts.
b. Mitigation. The Agency should advocate for
County General Plan and zoning measures to assure that the
current "buffer" status is maintained in perpetuity.
c. Monitoring Program. The Agency Director
shall review the current land uses proposed for the Unocal buffer
area in the General Plan and the proposed General Plan. The
Agency Director shall report to the Agency Board regarding the
land use designations for this area and request that the Board
advocate for permanent buffer status for this area.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.A. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in A.2 .a. above.
3 . Land Use Impact 3
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
related displacement of certain existing commercial or
residential land uses could create significant hardships for the
occupants of those properties.
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -4-
b. Mitigation. The Agency would be required to
comply with relocation mitigation guidelines set forth in State
and local laws for publicly-assisted projects.
C. Monitoring Program. Prior to displacement of
any existing commercial or residential land uses the Agency shall
prepare a Relocation Plan providing for assistance to displacees
in accordance with the Community Redevelopment Law and State and
local Relocation Guidelines.
d. Finding. The. above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted and, based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.A. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in A.3.a. above.
4. Land Use Impact 4
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Central
area parking needs may increase as a result of project-
facilitated commercial development.
b. Mitigation. The Agency should eventually
incorporate a specific, project-sponsored offstreet-parking
program as part .of the redevelopment program to eliminate parking
deficiencies and attract more private investment in commercial
development.
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement .projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted and, based upon the
information and analysis in Part W.A. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in A.4 .a. above.
5. Land Use Impact 5
a. Significant Environmental Effect. No
specific actions have been proposed to address the lack of street
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -5-
C .
landscaping, an identified significant deficiency in the Project
Area.
b. Mitigation. The Agency should incorporate
specific, near-term street landscaping and landscaping
maintenance in its overall infrastructure improvement assistance
program.
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted and, based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.A. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in A. 5.a. above.
B. Population, Housing, and Employment Impacts
1. Population, Housing, and Employment Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. The local
unemployment rate could be expected to decrease. However, there
. are no assurances that a substantial portion of these added local
jobs would go to local unemployed workers.
-- b. Mitigation. A targeted local jobs program
would be necessary to assure a significant beneficial project
impact on local unemployment rates. A targeted local jobs
program should include requirements that agreements between that
Agency and developers in the Project Area include employment
requirements and set targets for local participation in the
construction work force. Specific measures to be used include a
statement of local employment intent and first source agreements
requiring that developers use County job training programs as a
first source to fill job openings.
C. Monitoring Program. As a condition to
entering into any agreements for development in the Project Area
the Agency shall require that provisions are included providing
for targeted local hiring. Such provisions will include a
regular reporting program by the developer on the number of local
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -6-
residents hired to insure the successful implementation of such a
jobs program.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted and, based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.B. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in B. l.a. above.
C. Circulation Impacts
1. Circulation Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. The
largest relative traffic volume increases would occur on 7th
Street east of Vaqueros Avenue, where traffic volumes would
increase roughly three-fold. Traffic volumes on California
Street west of Hawthorne Drive would increase by roughly 80
percent. Relative traffic volume increases of this magnitude
would result in a significant adverse impact on neighborhood
quality, although the projected total traffic volumes would be
consistent with normal expectations for General Plan designated
"collector" streets (both of these routes are designated as
future "collectors" in the Rodeo Area General Plan, as shown on
Figure 6 in the EIR) .
b. Mitigation. The degree of impact could be
reduced by speed limit signage and enforcement. (This
unavoidable impact would be offset by the areawide traffic
circulation benefits and secondary redevelopment benefits of
these interconnections) .
C. Monitoring Program. Prior to completion of
the improvements to 7th street and California Street the Agency
shall meet with local law enforcement agencies regarding
increased enforcement of speed limits on these roads.
Improvements plans for these roads will include speed limit
signage at regular intervals.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted; however, based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.C. of the FEIR the finding is
made that the significant environmental effect described in
C. l .a. above cannot be avoided or substantially lessened.
Therefore, this significant effect will be discussed in Sections
VI (Alternatives) and VII (Statement of Overriding
Considerations) below.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -7-
2 . Circulation Impact 2
a. Significant Environmental Effect. The
project alone would not cause any significant impacts on the
operation of local intersections. Nevertheless, the overall
project-related traffic generation increase would contribute to
existing congestion currently experienced at four Project Area
intersections, particularly during the afternoon commute periods
when portions of the local street net work is used as a freeway
bypass.
b. Mitigation. The following mitigations . would
reduce these intersection impacts to insignificant levels:
° Signalization of the Willow Avenue/I-80
westside and eastside interchanges (in addition to the already
proposed roadway widening here)
Signalization of the San
Pablo/California Street intersection.
Implementation of the County-wide
General- Plan TSM measure.
Implementation of new transit service to
the area, including possible introduction of a new AC Transit bus
route to BART.
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan. The Agency shall, as a condition of approval
of all development projects which are significant traffic
generators, require compliance with the County TSM measures,
including annual reporting regarding the effectiveness of the TSM
program. The Agency Director shall meet with AC Transit and BART
prior to implementation of the Plan to advocate for additional
transit service to the Project Area. .
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.C. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -8-
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in C.2 .a. above.
3 . Circulation Impact 3
a. Significant Environmental Effect. An
anticipated adjacent I-80 freeway widening program (new HOV
lanes) is expected to involve a six-year construction period,-
with
eriod;with interim increases in peak period freeway congestion and
freeway bypass traffic through the Project Area. These
cumulative factors would cause an approximately 27 percent
increase in peak-hour traffic volumes on Parker Avenue between
7th and 4th Streets.
b. Mitigation. This impact would be
unavoidable, although the degree of impact would be reduced by
anticipated Caltrans-funded local street system mitigations
(e.g. , improvements to the Willow-Parker--;San Pablo interchange,
improvements to Parker .Avenue, etc. ) Also, this interim impact
would eventually be offset by the longer-term benefits of the
freeway widening in reducing future bypass tendencies.
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency and the
County shall maintain regular contact the Caltrans regarding the
proposed freeway widening to insure that Caltrans funded street
system mitigations are made prior to diversion of freeway traffic
to local streets.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted; however, based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.C. of the FEIR the finding is
made that the significant environmental effect described in
C. 3 . a._above cannot be avoided or substantially lessened.
Therefore, this significant effect will be discussed in Sections
VI (Alternatives) and VII (Statement of Overriding
Considerations) below.
4 . Circulation Impact 4
a. Significant Environmental Effect.
Anticipated substantial future job growth in Hercules is expected
to add to current peak period freeway bypass traffic on the
Willow-Parker-San Pablo through-route.
b. Mitigation. The mitigation measures
described in C. 2 .b. will reduce these impacts to insignificant
levels.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -9-
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan. The Agency shall, as a condition of approval
of all development projects which are significant traffic
generators, require compliance with the County TSM measures,
including annual reporting regarding the effectiveness of the TSM
program. The Agency Director shall meet with AC Transit and BART
prior to implementation of the Plan to advocate for additional
transit service to the Project Area.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted; and based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.C. of the FEIR the finding is
made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in C.4 .a.
5. Circulation Impact 5
a. Significant Environmental Effect. These
anticipated cumulative traffic increases make introduction of
diagonal parking along Parker Avenue (an idea which has been
discussed) infeasible. Anticipated substantial increases in
parking demand along Willow Avenue and in the Parker Avenue/Old
Rodeo Central commercial area are expected to occur.
b. Mitigation. Reject all proposals for
diagonal parking along Parker Avenue. In order to mitigate the
impacts on parking expected to occur, the Agency should advocate
for adequate parking requirements for the specialized office
designation along Willow and assist in the establishment of
common off-street parking facilities in downtown.
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency shall not
approve any plans for development along Parker Avenue which
include diagonal parking. The Agency shall require, as a
condition to providing assistance to development, that adequate
parking is provided for. Each year during the term of the
Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify capital
improvement projects to be undertaken that year, establish a
budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the improvement
projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years, the Agency, as
required by State law, will hold a public hearing for the purpose
32000E.PSO
06/01./90 _10-
of evaluating its progress in implementing the Redevelopment
Plan.
` d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.C. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in C.5.a. above.
D. Municipal Services Impacts
1. Police Services Impact
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Buildout
of the Project Area would increase the demand for police
services. Conversely_ , redevelopment could have positive effects
in reducing crime by ::improving the physical character and general
quality of life in the area.
b. Mitigation. The Agency should coordinate its
planning activities with the Contra Costa County Sheriff 's
Department.
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency shall provide
the Contra Costa County Sheriff 's Department with information
regarding any proposed development in the Project Area in order
to receive the Sheriff ' s Departments input regarding crime
prevention measures to be included in the plan.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based. upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.D. of the FEIR, the finding
is made- that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in D. l.a. above.
2. Fire Protection Impact
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Buildout
of the Project Area would increase the demand for fire protection
services, while redevelopment would have offsetting positive fire
protection impacts by encouraging renovation and elimination of
dilapidated and substandard structures. Cumulative development
in the Franklin Canyon area would generate the need for
additional fire protection facilities.
b. Mitigation. The proposed new Rodeo Community
Center may include provision of space for a new fire station to
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -11-
service cumulative demands. The Agency should coordinate its
planning activities with the Rodeo Hercules Fire Protection
District. Project-assisted development should be required to
meet RHFPD fire suppression requirements.
C. Monitoring Program. Prior to approval of
development plans for the proposed new government center the
Agency shall meet with the Fire District to determine whether a
new fire station should be included in the government center.
The Agency shall provide the Fire District with information
regarding any development proposed in the Project Area in order
for the Fire District to determine whether the development meets
the District' s fire suppression requirements and to provide the
Agency with input regarding fire safety measures that could be
incorporated into any development plan for the Project Area.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.D. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in D.2 .a. above.
3 . Sewer Service Impact
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
facilitated buildout is expected to increase sewage generation in
.the Project Area by about 12 percent. This increase would not
present a significant treatment capacity problem. Project
assisted sewer line renovation and replacement actions would
improve local sewage collection capacities.
b. Mitigation. Agency redevelopment planning
activities should be coordinated with the Rodeo Sanitary District
to identify where and when specific sewer collection system
improvements might be needed and to insure that there is adequate
capacity for the new development resulting from the redevelopment
project.
C. Monitoring Program. Prior to approval of
development projects in the Project Area, the Agency and the
County shall require that there is sufficient sewage capacity for
the development by providing the Rodeo Sanitary District with
information regarding the proposed development. Each year during
the term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will
identify capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
32000EPSO
06/OL/90 -12-
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.D. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in D.3 .a. above.
4 . School Service Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
facilitated increases in local residential population, in
combination with anticipated cumulative population increases
within the John Swett.-
wett. Unified School District outside the Project
Area, would probably require some eventual expansion of District
school facilities. However, the Agency anticipates project
funding of possible new school construction, site acquisition,
and/or existing facility improvements.
b. Mitigation. Anticipated Agency project
funding would tend to offset project-related enrollment
increases. However, the District should consider adoption of
school impact fees for all new development with the District.
The Agency should coordinate its redevelopment assistance
activities with the District to ensure that potential fees are
paid.. The Agency should also coordinate its housing construction
activities with the School District's planning activities to
determine if school capacity is available to meet projected needs
prior to construction.
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan. The Agency shall inform the School District
of any development approved in the Project Area prior to issuing
a building permit to the development in order to insure that the
School District receives the full amount of development fees to
which it is entitled. Prior to approving development of any
housing in the Project Area, the Agency shall coordinate with the
School District regarding enrollment capacity to meet the needs
of the proposed development.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -13-
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.D. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in D.4.a. above.
5. School Service Impact 2
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Hillcrest
School is located on and is accessed by California Street. The
circulation section of the EIR projects approximately 2 ,700
vehicular trips per average weekday along this segment of the
California Street, due to the project assisted interconnection of
the two existing, discontinuous sections of California Street.
This projected cumulative traffic increase on California Street
will present increased potentials for conflicts between Hillcrest
School turning movements and through traffic on California
Street, as well as increased safety risks for school-related
pedestrian activity.
b. Mitigation. A portion of the proposed Agency
financial assistance to the School District should be allocated
to the construction of a vehicular and bus pick-up and drop-off
access loop driveway and short term parking area for Hillcrest
School.
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.D. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and_
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in D. 5.a. above.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -14-
6. Park and Recreation Impacts
a. Significant Environmental Effect. The Agency
proposes to provide funding to augment recent Project Area park
acquisition actions by the East Bay Regional Park District
("EBRPD") , and to facilitate County implementation of the local
parks and recreation improvements called for in the Rodeo Area
General Plan. The moderate increase in demand for local parks
facilities due to project-facilitated buildout would be
adequately accommodated through project-assisted park acquisition
.and improvement activities.
b. Mitigation. The Agency should coordinate its
parks and recreation improvement actions with the EBRPD and the
John Swett Unified School District.
C. Monitoring Program. Each year during the
term of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency Director will identify
capital improvement projects to be undertaken that year,
establish a budget, and seek Agency Board approvals of the
improvement projects and funding mechanisms. Every two years,
the Agency, as required by State law, will hold a public hearing
for the purpose of evaluating its progress in implementing the
Redevelopment Plan. The Agency shall meet with representatives
of the Park District and the School District prior to
implementation of any park and recreation improvements.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.D. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in D. 6.a. above.
E. Drainage and Water Quality Impacts
1. Drainage and Water Quality Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
related drainage changes, although minor, could contribute to
existing flooding and ponding problems in the Project Area.
However, with completion of project-assisted storm drainage
improvements, the project is expected to improve rather than
exacerbate existing drainage problems in the area.
b. Mitigation. Agency planning activities
should be coordinated with the Contra Costa County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District ("CCCFCWCD") to ensure that
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -15-
drainage improvements precede or coincide with project-assisted
road improvements.
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency Executive
Director or his designee shall meet with the CCCFCWCD prior to
preparation or amendment to the Agency capital improvements plans
regarding drainage improvements in order to coordinate the Agency
drainage improvements with the CCCFCWCD.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.E. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in E. l.a. above.
2. Drainage and Water Quality Impact 2 .
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
assisted construction activities could have temporary impacts on
Rodeo Creek water quality (siltation, etc. ) . In addition to
increased siltation from soils exposed during construction, water
quality would also be impacted by post-construction runoff
carrying urban debris and petroleum waste from paved surfaces.
b. Mitigation. To minimize short-term
sedimentation impacts resulting from project-induced construction
activities, individual projects assisted by the agency should be
required to incorporate the following measures:
(1) For construction projects which involve
substantial land disturbance (grading of areas in excess of 0. 125
acres) , temporary sedimentation traps should be installed onsite
to reduce intrusion of construction sediments into. Rodeo Creek.
(2) Construction operations which may disrupt
. . substantial exterior surface areas (in excess of 0. 125 acres) ,
particularly grading activities, should be conducted, as much as
possible, during the dry season to avoid erosion of disturbed
soils.
(3) Construction of Project Area development
projects involving vacant sites of 0. 125 acres or grater, and all
major infrastructure improvements should be carefully staged to
minimize the amount of bare soil and, therefore, erosion during
construction.
(4) Landscaping should include fast-growing
groundcovers to stabilize soil after construction.
32000£-PSO
06/01/90 -16-
To minimize the long-term discharging of
pollutants and nutrients into Rodeo Creek related to project-
induced increases in urban uses, all Agency assisted projects
should incorporate maintenance practices such as catch basin
clearing and pavement repair. Agency assisted developers and/or
property owners should be required to include in their drainage
plans a realistic long-term program for cleaning and maintaining
private paved areas. The responsibility for cleaning project
drives and parking areas would be the responsibility of
individual Project Area property owners.
C. Monitoring Program. As a condition to
approval of development in the Project Area, the Agency and the
County shall require that the above mitigation measures be
included in the construction contract. The Agency and/ or the
County shall insure that the above measures are complied with by
ongoing site inspections at all construction sites in the Project
Area. The Agency shall include in all agreements for
development of Agency assisted projects a requirement that
ongoing maintenance include a program for cleaning and
maintaining private paved areas in accordance with the above
mitigation measure.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV. E. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in E. 2 .a. above.
3 . Drainage and Water Quality Impact 3
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
assisted construction activities along the estuarine segments of
Rodeo Creek could encounter hazardous soil contamination as a
result of past, unreported toxic discharges into the San Pablo
Bay by nearby petrochemical refineries.
b. Mitigation.
(1) The Agency should advocate implementation by
the County and the local refineries, in consultation with the
Environmental Protection Agency, of a soil sampling program, and
if warranted based on the results of that sampling, formulation
of a soil remediation plan.
(2) As a condition of Agency assistance to any
project which may involve disturbance of waterfront or estuarine
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -17-
soil, the project proponent should be required by the agency to
conduct preliminary soil sampling in several areas around the
project site in order to determine if there are contaminated
soils at the site, before excavation begins. If the soil samples
show evidence of soil contamination, then measure (3) below
should be implemented.
(3) Should obviously contaminated, discolored, or
odorous soils be encountered during preliminary soil sampling or
subsequent excavation and construction phases, work should cease
until an evaluation can be made of the potential risks associated
with contamination and associated remediation needs.
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency and the
County, as a condition to approval of development plans in the
Project Area, shall require that preliminary soil sampling be
conducted to determine if there is contamination. In the event
contamination is discovered the Agency shall require that all
work stop until remediation of the contamination is complete.
The Agency and the County will contact the EPA and the local
refineries within 120 days of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan
regarding implementation of a soil sampling program.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.E. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in E.3 .a. above.
F. Noise Impacts
1. Noise Impact l
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
related traffic volume changes would result in a significant
change in noise levels along 7th Street east of Parker Avenue and
along San Pablo Avenue west of Willow Avenue, although these
noise level increases would not reach average daily noise levels
which exceed General Plan Noise Element parameters for
residential areas, and would be consistent with normal
expectations for General Plan designated "collector" and
"arterial" streets. (As shown on Figure 6 in this EIR, the Rodeo
Area General Plan designates 7th Street as a "collector" and San
Pablo (Old Highway 40) as an "arterial. ")
b. Mitigation. The degree of impact could be
reduced by speed limit signage and enforcement and maintenance of
a smooth roadway surface.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -18-
C. Monitoring Program. . The Agency shall meet
with' the Contra Costa-.County Sheriff's Department prior to
completion of the 7th Street connection regarding enforcement of
speed limits. Plans for the 7th Street connection shall include
speed limit signage at strategically located places. The Public
Works Department shall make an annual site visit to the 7th
Street connection upon its completion to determine maintenance
needs. The County will provide roadway maintenance on an as
needed basis to ensure a smooth roadway surface.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted; however, based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.F. of the FEIR the finding is
made that the significant environmental effect described in
F. l.a. above cannot be avoided or substantially lessened.
Therefore, this significant effect will be discussed in Sections
VI (Alternatives) and VII (Statement of Overriding
Considerations) below.
2 . Noise Impact 2
a. Significant Environmental Effect. A
substantial portion of the urbanized Project Area, including
certain existing and future noise-sensitive land uses
(residential, schools, etc. ) would be exposed to exterior noise
levels in excess of County Noise Element compatibility standards.
Problem areas include development along the San Pablo/Old Highway
40 corridor and in proximity to the freeway, and to a lesser
extent, development near the railroad and the two refineries. To
the extent that the project results in renovated or intensified
residential and school development in these areas, the project
would contribute to existing and projected future potentials for
significant adverse noise impacts.
b. Mitigation. Project-assisted development
near residential or other noise-sensitive land uses should not
proceed until completion of detailed noise studies and
incorporation of necessary noise mitigation measure (sound-rated
glass, wall insulation, etc. ) .
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency and the
County, as a condition to approval, shall require that all
development plans near residential or other noise sensitive land
uses prepare a detailed noise study and that all necessary
mitigation measure recommended by the noise study are included in
the conditions to approval of the development.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 _19-
C C
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.F. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in F.2.a. above.
3 . Noise Impact 3
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Where
project-assisted commercial or residential land uses are adjacent
to one another, there may be adverse noise impacts.
b. Mitigation. Noise-related performance
standards should be included in agreements for such project-
assisted development activities.
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency shall require
that all Agency assisted projects include noise related
performance standards as a condition to providing Agency
assistance to the development. The Public Works Department shall
review the noise impacts of all Agency assisted developments on
an annual basis to determine whether the development is complying
with the noise related performance standards.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.F. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in F.3 .a. above.
4 . Noise Impact 4
a. Significant Environmental Effect.
Significant temporary noise impacts on adjacent residential areas
and schools could be expected during the construction of project-
assisted building and infrastructure improvements.
b. Mitigation. To minimize construction period
noise impacts, the Redevelopment Agency should include
construction period noise criteria in its agreements with agency-
assisted developers and construction contractors to control hours
of construction activity (i.e. , non-holidays between 7AM and 5 PM
Monday through Friday and between 9 AM and 5 PM on Saturday) .
construction documents should also include provisions to ensure
that all construction equipment is adequately muffled and
maintained.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -20-
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency, as a
condition to. providing assistance to developers, shall require
that construction noise criteria be included in construction
contracts. The Public Works Department shall make regular site
visits to construction sites to determine if noise criteria are
being met.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.F. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in F.4 .a. above.
G. Air Quality Impacts
1. Air Ouality Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
facilitated increases in local private investment and
improvements may result in a further increase in local concerns
and complaints regarding objectionable odor (hydrogen sulfide)
emissions from the two adjacent refineries. Over the longer
term, anticipated increases in applicable air quality standards,
in combination with technological advances in oil refinery odor
emissions controls, may offset increases in local sensitivity to
odor and other refinery emission concerns. However, there is no
local (Rodeo) air quality monitoring station to measure such
changes.
b. Mitigation. Only the introduction and
operation of a regular BAAQMD air quality monitoring program in
the Rodeo area would provide a definitive indication of impacts
and mitigation needs. The Agency should incorporate written
notification in all assistance agreements involving residential
and commercial development in the Project Area, which advises
future residents and businesses in the Project Area that there
are existing odor problems associated with the two nearby
refineries. The written notification should include information
that the BAAQMD will continue to be responsible for monitoring
refinery odor emissions for responding to associated complaints
from residents and for enforcing related laws and penalties.
C. Monitoring Program. Within 120 days of
adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency and the County
shall contact the BAAQMD about establishing an air quality
monitoring program in the Rodeo area. All Agency development
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -21-
II
agreements shall include notification of existing odor problems
in the Project Area including the above recommended information.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.G. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in G. l.a. above.
2 . Air Quality Impact 2
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
assisted construction activities would generate pollutants
(particulate emissions) intermittently in the project area.
b. Mitigation. For project-assisted
infrastructure and building construction activities, Agency
agreements with associated landowners, developers, and/or
contractors should stipulate that appropriate particulate control
measures will be implemented during the project construction
period, including the following:
Complete sprinkling of all exposed
portions of the site twice daily (water sprinkling can reduce
dust emissions by about 50 percent) ;
Scheduling major dust-generating
activities for the early morning and other hours when wind
velocities are low; and
° Covering storage piles (fill, refuse,
etc. ) .
C. Monitoring Program. As a condition to
.approval of development by the Agency the Agency shall require
that all construction contracts include the above listed
mitigation measures. The Department of Public Works shall
enforce such mitigation by regular site inspections.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV.G. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in G.2 .a. above.
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -22-
i
H. Archaeological Impacts
1. Archaeological Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Identified
archaeological sites exist in the Project Area. Project-assisted
infrastructure and building construction could disturb theses
known or other unknown archaeological resources, resulting in a
significant environmental impact.
b. Mitigation. The Agency should require that
all applications for grading permits involving project-assisted
development be reviewed by the California Archaeological
inventory prior to permit issuance.
The Agency should also stipulate in its
agreements with developers and landowners that:
(1) In the event that subsurface cultural resources
are encountered during approved ground-disturbing activities,
work in the immediate vicinity must be stopped and a qualified
archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds. The discovery or
disturbance of any cultural resources should be reported to the
California Archaeological Inventory and the Native American
Heritage Commission. Mitigation measures prescribed by these
groups and required by the County should be undertaken prior to
resumption of construction activities.
(2) Development projects which the CAI determines may
be located on or adjoining an identified archaeological site
should proceed only after the developer contracts a qualified
archaeologist to conduct a determination in regard to
preservation of the site. In the event that a significant
cultural resource and preservation need is identified, .
preservation and/or excavation and fill measures should be
coordinated with the agency, the CAI, and, if warranted, the
Native American Heritage Commission.
(3) If disturbance of a Project Area archaeologic or
cultural resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program
including measures set forth in Appendix K of the CEQA Guidelines
should be implemented.
C. Monitoring Program. Prior to approval of all
permits for grading, the Agency shall contact the California
Archaeological Inventory to determine whether archaeological
sites might exist on the site. As a condition to approval of
development in the Project Area, the Agency and the County shall
require that the above mitigation measures are complied with.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -23-
C
All agreements entered into by the Agency for development in the
Project Area shall include the above listed mitigation measures.
x, d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
. information and analysis in Part IV.H. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in H. l.a. above.
I. Vegetation and Wildlife Impacts
1. . Vegetation and Wildlife Impact 1
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
assisted redevelopment activities as currently proposed are not
expected to result in any disturbances of shoreline areas and
natural wetland values northwest of the railroad.
b. Mitigation. If any Agency assistance to
shoreline development is ultimately proposed, these activities
would probably require an Army Corps of Engineers permit and
preparation of a related wetlands impact mitigation plan.
C. Monitoring Program. Prior to approval of any
shoreline development the Agency shall require that an Army Corps
of Engineers permit and any other permits required from federal
or State agencies be obtained and that all mitigation required by
the permitting authorities are complied with.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program -are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV. I. of the FEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
.monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in I. i.a. above.
2 . Vegetation and Wildlife Impact 2
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Project-
assisted improvements to Rodeo Creek (trash clearing, provision
of linear park facilities) may present opportunities to
reintroduce creek biotic values.
b. Mitigation. Project-assisted improvements,
to the extent possible, should include reintroduction of riparian
vegetation.
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -24-
C. Monitoring Program. The Agency shall include
within its plans for improvements to the Rodeo Creek area the
reintroduction of riparian vegetation to the extent possible
based on the recommendation of a biologist to be consulted by the
Agency.
d. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted. Based upon the
information and analysis in Part IV. I of the FEIR, the finding is
made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in I.2 .a. above.
J. Growth-Inducing Impacts
1. Growth Inducing Impacts.
a. Significant Environmental Effect. Projects
directly stimulated by Project implementation are detailed in
Part III, c on page 5 of the EIR. Secondary growth inducing
effects, due to the Agency's use of its financial tools, may
release existing constraints to development, i.e. the provision
of adequate utilities or circulation facilities may facilitate
new development which may not otherwise have occurred.
b. Mitigation. None proposed, as growth and
revitalization of the Project Area is a goal of the Redevelopment
Plan.
C. Monitoring Program. Not applicable.
d. . Finding. Based upon the information and
analysis in Part VII.A. of the FEIR the finding is made that the
significant environmental effect described in J. l.a. above cannot
be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, this
significant effect will be discussed in Sections VI
(Alternatives) and VII (Statement of Overriding Considerations)
below.
K. Cumulative Impacts
1. Significant Environmental Effect. In
addition to the proposed Redevelopment Plan, a number of other
current and anticipated projects in the Project Area vicinity
will also contribute to local environmental changes. These other
projects are described on page 51 of the EIR. In summary, they
include county-approved residential and commercial developments
east and south of the project area, and similar residential
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -25-
development within the City of Hercules south of the project
area.
, The cumulative effects of these projects, in combination
with the proposed Rodeo Area Redevelopment Plan are considerable,
and are reflected primarily in the traffic, noise, and air
quality impact findings described in the EIR.
2 . Mitigation. See mitigation measures outlined
above with respect to individually identified significant
environmental effects.
3 . Monitoring Program. Not applicable.
4. Finding. The above mitigation measure and
monitoring program are hereby adopted; however, based upon the
information and analysis in Part VII.D. of the FEIR the finding
is made that the significant environmental effect described in
K. l.a. above cannot be avoided or substantially lessened.
Therefore, this significant effect will be discussed in Sections
VI (Alternatives) and VIZ (Statement of Overriding
Considerations) below.
V. Summary of Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
The following significant impacts of the proposed
Redevelopment Plan are considered unavoidable:
J. The increase in traffic volume on 7th Street east of
Vaqueros Avenue and on California Street west of Hawthorne Drive
(as described in Part IV, C. l (a) above) ;
2_` The interim increase in peak period freeway congestion
and freeway bypass traffic (as described in Part IV, C. 4 (a) .
above) ;
3 . The increase in peak freeway bypass traffic on the
Willow-Parker San Pablo through-route due to job growth in
Hercules (as described in Part IV, C. 5 (a) above) ;
4 . The increase in noise levels due to project related.
traffic volume changes (as described in Part IV, , F. 1 (a) above) ;
5. The growth-inducing influences of providing the Agency
with redevelopment powers and financing tools (as described in
Part IV, J. 1(a) above) ;
6. Cumulative impacts of redevelopment induced Project
Area growth combined with anticipated residential and commercial
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -26-
developments outside the Project Area (as described in Part IV,
K(a) above) .
These significant adverse impacts may occur despite the
adoption by the City Council and Agency of all mitigation
measures related to these impacts that were identified in the
FEIR. No mitigation measures identified in the FEIR have been
rejected by the Agency and the City Council as being infeasible
due to specific economic, social, or other considerations.
VI. Findings on the Feasibility of Alternatives to the Proposed
Redevelopment Plan
The EIR discusses four alternatives to the Redevelopment
Plan, the adoption of which would, in some cases, avoid the
significant environmental effects listed in Section V above.
Each alternative is discussed in this section, and findings are
made regarding its feasibility.
A. Alternatives
1. No Project
The no project alternative would mean no Contra Costa
County Redevelopment Agency involvement in the Project Area. As
a result, it is assumed that the Project Area would remain in its
present physical and economic state. No actions would be taken
by the Agency to fund infrastructure, utility, and/or circulation
improvements, or to provide financing assistance to property
owners for repair and renovation of existing commercial and
residential structures. No Agency funding assistance would be
provided towards road interconnections and frontage improvements.
No Agency funding assistance would be provided towards park and
other community facilities development, or towards local storm
drainage improvements. No Agency funding would be provided
towards deferred or below-market-rate loans for development of
affordable new rental and ownership housing.
Without the project the Project Area is expected to
continue to stagnate. Rehabilitation of housing and commercial
structures would not occur. Local road systems, storm drainage,
open space, utility, and other infrastructure deficiencies would
probably continue and worsen. Without redevelopment assistance
the estimated significant increases in downtown area retail,
service, and office, jobs. would not be expected to occur.
Without the project-assisted roadway improvements future through-
traffic and total traffic volumes on Parker Avenue would be
significantly higher than anticipated with the project, adding
32000EPSO
06/01/90 -27-
I
significantly to existing safety conflicts and operational
problems along this route.
Crime rates in the Project Area would be expected to
continue to be disproportionately high, as a result of the
deteriorating physical character and general quality of life in
the Project Area. Fire risks associated with local building
deterioration would remain unabated. Project funding toward
school improvements (existing facility improvements, site
acquisition, new school construction) would not occur. Current
and anticipated over-capacity conditions at Hillcrest, Carquinez ,
and Garretson schools would remain. Similarly, the proposed
project assistance to local parks and recreation improvements
would not occur, and existing perceptions of inadequate local
parks and open space provisions would remain.
Noise levels along 7th Avenue and California Street,
which would increase significantly with the project, would not
change noticeably without the project. The no-project scenario
would have no significant impact or mitigating effect on local
air quality conditions. Project-related potentials for impact on
possible archaeologic and biotic values in the area would not
occur under the no-project scenario.
2. Modified Redevelopment Activities
Under this alternative redevelopment scenario, the
emphasis of project actions would shift from central area
commercial improvement to residential neighborhood improvement.
The proposed project allocation of redevelopment funds would be
shifted from "commercial development" towards "housing
rehabilitation and new construction. " Similarly, expenditures
anticipated for transportation system and infrastructure
improvements would be directed more towards residential
neighborhoods rather than commercial areas.
As a result of the shift of project emphasis, greater
assistance towards the rehabilitation of the area 's existing
housing stock would be provided. The anticipated "catalytic"
effect of this residential improvement emphasis would not be as
significant as expected from commercial area rehabilitation.
Substantial gains in employment opportunities for Project Area
residents would not be expected to occur, leaving the status quo
of a jobs/ housing imbalance in place.
Because most of the project-related traffic generation
increase and most of the traffic volume increment shown in the
EIR is related to project-induced job growth, the alternative de-
emphasis on commercial revitalization would result in a major
32000E.P50
06/01/90 -28-
reduction in project traffic impacts on local residential
streets. Project assisted introduction of more intensive
commercial activities and related noise near existing residential
uses- would be less likely, although noise impacts. associated with
local traffic changes would be the same. The impacts on
municipal services, drainage, air quality and archaeological
resources would be similar to the project.
3 . Modified Redevelopment Boundary
This alternative would be similar to the proposed
project in terms of allocation of funding, but would involve a
modified project area boundary. Two iterations of this
alternative are considered: (a) enlargement of the Project Area
boundary to include all of the Rodeo community, including the
Viewpoint subdivision on the east side of the freeway; and
(b) contraction of the Project Area boundary to include only the
"Old Rodeo" area.
a. Smaller Project Area. Blighting influences
affect all portions of the proposed Rodeo redevelopment project
area, and failure to treat conditions in one subarea of the
Project Area (by excluding it from redevelopment actions) would
jeopardize and undermine the effectiveness of redevelopment
efforts in the remainder of the project area. Also, the
effectiveness of a comprehensive redevelopment program would be
reduced by having to delete certain needed activities, or
portions of activities, to compensate for reduced revenues
accruable to the Redevelopment Agency from a smaller project
area. Presumably, confinement of redevelopment actions to the
"Old Rodeo" area would also eliminate project assistance to the
California Street and 7th Street interconnections. As a result,
future cumulative through-traffic impacts on "Old Rodeo" (Parker
Avenue) would be greater. On the other hand, the impacts of the
two interconnections and related traffic increases on
neighborhood quality along those routes would be eliminated.
The ability to improve local school and
neighborhood-serving open space would also be reduced or
eliminated under this option because of the reduced boundary and
the reduced revenues available for such purposes.
If the smaller boundary alternative was selected,
the comparative environmental implications would include a
substantially reduced employment growth increment, a resulting
substantial decrease in Project Area traffic generation, an
increase in future traffic volumes on Parker Avenue (assuming no
California Street and 7th Street interconnections) , reduced
municipal services demand increases, elimination of project
32000E.PSO
06/01/90 -29-
assistance to schools and parks, greater noise impacts along
Parker, reduced noise impacts along 7th and California Streets,
and reduced air quality, biotic, and archaeological impacts.
b. Larder Project Area. The Redevelopment
Agency has determined that blighted conditions within the current
Project Area boundary meet the criteria of state redevelopment
law for establishment of a redevelopment project area. The Board
of Supervisors and Planning Commission have carefully delineated
the boundaries of the Project Area to include only blighted and
predominantly urbanized areas,. in order to comply with state law
and to minimize the fiscal and other impacts of the proposed
Redevelopment Plan. Given the nature of land use patterns in the
Rodeo area east of the freeway, a larger area would include
either: (1) undeveloped lands that are not predominantly
urbanized or blighted; or (2) lands containing relatively new
development that would not meet the aforementioned blight
definitions. As such, the large area would not conform to state
law or to the Board of Supervisors ' policy of minimizing fiscal
and other impacts of its redevelopment proposals. For these
reasons, a larger Project Area in the Rodeo vicinity is not
considered to be a viable alternative.
The larger boundary alterative, if selected, would
not result in a significant change in environmental impacts,
since no substantial additional development could occur in the
Viewpointe area (already built out) .
4 . Alternative Sites
This alternative would include implementation of a
similar redevelopment program, but on an alternative site
somewhere else in the county. Six possible sites were identified
in the EIR as potential alternative redevelopment sites. These
six sites were selected as possible alternative sites by virtue
of their location in. the unincorporated area of Contra Costa
County (i.e. , within Redevelopment Agency jurisdiction) , and the
possible presence of blighted conditions which may meet the
prerequisite criteria of State redevelopment law for
establishment of a redevelopment project area. Other .possible
sites were excluded from the list because it appeared that they
would not meet the aforementioned criteria.
Implementation of one or more of the alternative site
choices listed above may result in less adverse land use,
traffic, noise, and air quality impacts than the proposed action.
However, all have been rejected by the Agency in favor of the
project because none would meet the basic objective of the
proposed project; i.e. , to eliminate the blighting factors in the
320 E.P
00 50
06/01/90 -30-
Rodeo area which have reduced its utilization to a point where it
has become a significant physical, social, and economic burden on
the County, a situation which cannot reasonably. be expected to be
alleviated or reversed by private enterprise actions alone.
B. Findings on Alternatives
The Agency and the Board find and determine that the
alternatives to the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan are not desirable,
are infeasible and are therefore rejected for the following
reasons:
1. The alternatives would allow the Project Area to
decline and would rely solely on market conditions in the area to
reduce or eliminate existing blighted conditions. The existing
blight in the area is evidence that market conditions have not
been an effective means of curing these ills in the past.
2 . The alternatives would not involve the tax-
increment revenue generated through redevelopment (which revenues
are needed ,to alleviate blighting conditions) ; without the
elimination of blight, new businesses would be discouraged from
locating in the area and existing businesses would be discouraged
from staying in the area.
3 . The Redevelopment Plan would encourage improvement
of the jobs/housing balance by assisting in commercial
development in the Project Area. The alternatives would not
provide this same benefit to the Project Area.
4 . Specific economic, social or other considerations
of the project described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, below, make infeasible the alternatives.
Approval of any of the alternatives would reduce the benefits to
be obtained from the project. Since the benefits of the
Redevelopment Plan outweigh its adverse impacts, those impacts
are deemed "acceptable" by the Board and the Agency. In short,
the Board and the Agency find and determine that the ratio of
benefit to impact is the most favorable to the County and its
existing and future citizens under the' Rodeo Redevelopment Plan
scenario.
VII . Statement of Overriding Considerations
Notwithstanding the disclosure of the unavoidable adverse
effects of the Redevelopment Plan which are summarized in Section
V above, the County and Agency have determined pursuant to 14
California Code of Regulations Section 15093 , that the benefits
of the proposed Redevelopment Plan outweigh these unavoidable
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -31-
adverse environmental effects, and the Redevelopment Plan should
be approved.
-The Board of Supervisors and Agency approve the
Redevelopment Plan for the following reasons based upon the
record:
A. The Redevelopment Plan will provide a mechanism to
provide essential infrastructure improvements to the Project
Area, including, but not limited to, street and intersection
improvements, transportation system improvements, frontage
improvements, drainage improvements, sewer improvements,
lighting.
B. The Redevelopment Plan will provide a mechanism to
strengthen the existing Project Area residential areas by
assisting in rehabilitation of the housing stock, promoting new
infill housing construction, assisting in school, parks, and
grounds improvements, providing neighborhood open space,
improving drainage facilities, and constructing street and
frontage improvements.
C. Implementation of the Redevelopment Plan will improve
and upgrade deteriorated housing stock in the Project Area and
will assist in the construction of new affordable housing,
thereby improving and expanding the supply of housing affordable
to low and moderate income households.
D. The Redevelopment Plan will enable the Agency to
facilitate the redevelopment of parcels designated for commercial
development in the General Plan, and to provide economic
development assistance, in order to revitalize the stagnant
economy—of the Project Area, improve the jobs/housing balance
consistent with General Plan policies, and provide job
opportunities and enhanced incomes for economically disadvantaged
Project Area residents.
E. The Redevelopment Plan enables the County and the
Agency to eliminate the blighting influences present in the
Project Area so that the Area may be of physical, social and
economic benefit to the residents of the Project Area and to the
community as a whole.
F. The Redevelopment Plan will enhance the tax revenue
generating capacity of the Project Area to the ultimate benefit
of the community and all affected taxing agencies.
32000E.PS0
06/01/90 -32-
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on July 10, 1990, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Fanden
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RESOLUTION NO. 90/ 446
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADOPTING
WRITTEN FINDINGS AND RESPONSES TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS
RECEIVED IN CONNECTION WITH CONSIDERATION TO THE RODEO
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF
HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33363
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Contra
Costa (the "Agency") has prepared and submitted to the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa (the "Board) , for the
Board's consideration, the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan (the
"Redevelopment Plan") ; and
WHEREAS, in connection with consideration of the
Redevelopment Plan, the Board and the Agency conducted and
completed a duly noticed public hearing on June 19, 199.0, pursuant
to the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 33355; and
WHEREAS, at or prior to the joint public hearing, the Board
and the Agency received certain written objections to the
Redevelopment Plan, which written objections are set forth in Part
II of that certain document entitled "Rodeo Redevelopment Plan:
Written Findings and Responses pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 3336311 , which document is attached to this Resolution as
Exhibit A, incorporated herein by this reference, and hereinafter
referred to as the "Findings" ; and
WHEREAS, Part III of the Findings contains the Board's and
the Agency's written findings and responses to the above-described
written objections, which written findings and responses have been
prepared and considered by the Board and the Agency in connection
with consideration of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, all in
accordance with the provision of Health and Safety Code Section
33363 .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board hereby finds
and certifies that the Findings have been prepared in compliance
with. the provisions of Health and Safety Code Section 33363 ; that
the Findings adequately address the written objections received by
the Board and the Agency in connection with the Redevelopment
Plan; and that the Board has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Findings prior to approving the
Redevelopment Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Findings set forth- in the
attached Exhibit A are hereby approved and adopted as, and shall
constitute, the written findings and responses of the Board as
required by Health and Safety Code Section 33363 .
cc: Redevelopment
Community Development
County Administrator f hereby 0ertiy that this fs a true and correct OW of
Auditor-Controller an action taken and entered on the minutea of the
County Counsel Board of Su iso on the date shown.
ATTES (9gTED: 10------
PHIL CH R,Clerk of the Board
of Sups rvi rs and Co ty Administrator
0,)
By ,DeDuty
ra47/rodeo.res
90/446
J. EXHIBIT A
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
RODEO REDEVELOPMENT AREA
' WRITTEN FINDINGS AND RESPONSES PURSUANT
TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33363
Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa
July 10., 1990
32000N.P50
06/28/90
I. PURPOSE
The Redevelopment Agency of Contra Costa County (the "Agency")
has prepared, and the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County
(the "Board") is considering for adoption, the Redevelopment Plan
for the Rodeo Redevelopment Area (the "Redevelopment Plan") . On
June 19 , 1990 the Agency and the Board conducted and completed a
duly noticed joint public hearing on the Redevelopment Plan in
accordance with the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section
33355. At or prior to the joint public hearing, the Agency and the
Board received certain written objections to the Redevelopment
Plan. Those written objections are set forth in Part II of this
document.
Health and Safety Code Section 33363 states:
At the hour set in the notice required by Section 33361
for hearing objections, the legislative body shall
proceed to hear all written and oral objections. Before
adopting the redevelopment plan the legislative body
shall evaluate the report of the agency, the report and
recommendation of the project area committee, and all
evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of
the plan and shall make written findings in response to
each written objection of an affected property owner or
taxing entity. The legislative body shall respond in
writing to the written objections received before or at
the noticed hearing, including any extensions thereof,
and may additionally respond to written objections that
are received after the hearing. The written responses
shall describe the disposition of the issues raised.
The legislative body shall address the written objections
in detail,' giving reasons for not accepting specified
objections and suggestions. The legislative body shall
include a good-faith, reasoned analysis in its response
and, for this purpose, Conclusionary statements
unsupported by factual information shall not suffice.
This document constitutes the written findings and responses
of the Board, as the legislative body of Contra Costa County,
prepared and adopted in accordance with the requirements of Health
and Safety Code Section 33363 . Specifically, Part III below
contains the Board' s written findings and responses to the various
written objections set forth in Part II.
Each substantive comment or objection in Part II has been
assigned a reference identification number in the margin next to
the comment or objection. The Board's written findings and
responses to each substantive comment or objections are set forth
32000N.P50
06/28/90 -1-
and organized in Part III according to those reference
identification numbers..
II. WRITTEN OBJECTIONS
Written objections to the Redevelopment Plan were received
from the following persons and entities:
A. Lucille Ely June 11, 1990
B. Charles Tanksley June 11, 1990
C. Dolores Tanksley June 11, 1990
D. Rodeo Advisory Committee June 19, 1990
E. Andree Cargile
F. Pamela Peck June 19, 1990
The written objections are set forth in their entirety on the
following pages.
In addition, 12 Letters of Comment were received by the City
and the Agency regarding the Environmental Impact Report ('HEIR")
--prepared for the General Plan Amendment, the rezoning and the
Redevelopment Plan. These comments have been responded to and
disposed of in the Final EIR and those responses are hereby
Incorporated by reference in these findings.
32000N.PS0
06/28/90 -2-
346 Pinole Avenue
Rodeo, CA. 94372
June 11 , 1990
Nancy Fanden, Supervisor
1 District 21 805 LAS Juntas St .
Martinez , CA. 94553 . ,
Dear Mrs. Fanden, ,
A-1 As a taxpayer in Contra Costa County and a concerned
resident of Rodeo, I am requesting you to vote AGAINST the
completion of the Rodeo Area Redevelopment Plan for the present
time. Further study should be made on some of the subjects in
the Plan, the first being the opening of Seventh Street and
California Street . Did you know California Street borders a
Grade School and every school day ,morning and afternoon ,there
ar,e children walking to and from school on that street? Also
many of the cars taking the children to and from school use the
same route. At the present time parking is allowed on only one
side of the street and the cars that are delivering and picking
up the children have to double park and that means there is very
little space for other traffic to pass. Using Seventh Street
and California Street as an alternate route to and from the Car-
quinez Bridge during the widening of Highway I-80 lfor a six [6J
year construction period) would most certainly make that area
dangerous and unsafe for the school children. ALSO the opening of
California Street would only lead to an easier exit for the Drug
Dealers already so prevalent in the Housing Project .
A-2Second, there certainly should be a Buffer Zone tstween any .
Housing Project and any Refinery in the area .
A-3 Third and certainly not least , the Tax Money that is generated
from the Redevelopment Plan should not be used to build Any
County Buildings in the Rodeo Area. WHAT WOULD THESE BUILDINGS
BE USED FOR? IT DOESN' T SAY ! The money should be used for the
development of Rodeo only and not for the County.
Your attention and consideration in this matter will be
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely yovis ,
"Lucille Ely
321 Vallejo Avenue
Rodeo, California 94572
June 11 , 1990
Nancy Fanden, Supervisor
- District #2, 805 Las Juntas St.
Martinez, California 94553
Dear Mrs. Fanden,
B_1 As a taxpayer in Contra Costa County and a concerned
resident of Rodeo, I am requesting you to vote AGAINST the
completion of the Rodeo Area Redevelopment Plan for the present
time. Further study should be made on some of the subjects in
the Plan, the first being the opening of Seventh Street and •
California Street. Did you know California Street borders a
Grade School and every school day',morning and afternoon ,there
arae children walking to and from school on that street? Also
many of the cars taking the children to and from school use the
same route. At the present time parking is allowed on only one
side of the street and the cars that are delivering and picking
up the children have to double park and that means there is very
little space for other traffic to pass. Using Seven-%.h Street
_ and California Street as an alternate route to and from the Car-
quinez Bridge during the widening of Highway I-80 [ for a six [6]
year construction period] would most certainly make that area
dangerous and unsafe for the school children. ALSO t4. opening of
California Street would only lead to an easier exit for the Drug
Dealers already so prevalent in the Housing Project .
Second , there certainly should be a Buffer Zone cetween any
Housing Project and any Refinery in the area .
Third and certainly not least , the Tax Money that is generated
from the Redevelopment Plan should not be used to bu_id Any
County Buildings in the Rodeo Area . WHAT WOULD. THESE BUILDINGS
BE USED FOR? IT DOESN ' T SAY ! The money should be used for the
develooment of Rodeo _only and - not for the County .
Your attention and consideration in this matter will be
greatly appreciated.
S n rely yours
• Charles Tanksley
321 Valle,j o Avenue
Rodeo, California 94572
June 11 , 1990
Supervisor Nancy Fanden
District #20 805 Las Juntas St.
Martinez , California 94553
Dear Mrs. Fanden,
C-1 As a taxpayer in Contra Costa County and a concerned
resident of Rodeo, I am requesting you to vote AGAINST the
completion of the Rodeo Area Redevelopment Plan for the present
time. Further study should be made on some of the subjects in
the Plan, the first being the opening of Seventh Street and
California Street . Did you know California Street borders a
Grade School and every school day ,morning and afternoon ,there
are children walking to and from school on that street? Also
many of the cars taking the children to and from school use the
same route . At the present time parking is allowed on only one
side of the street and the cars that are delivering and picking
up the children have to double park and that means there is vepy .
little space for other traffic to pass. UsinS Seventh Street
and California Street as an alternate route to and from the Car-
quinez Bridge during the widening of Highway I-80 [ for a six [61
year construction period] would most certainly make that area
dangerous and unsafe for the school children. ALSO the opening of
California Street would only lead to an easier exit for the Drug
Dealers already so prevalent in the Housing Project .
Second , there certainly should be a Buffer Zone between any
Housing Project and any Refinery in the area .
Third and certainly not least , the Tax Money that is generated
from the Redevelopment Plan should not be used to build Any
County Buildings in the Rodeo Area . WHAT WOULD THESE BUILDINGS
BE USED FOR? 11 DOESN ' T SAY ! The money should be used for the
development of Rodeo only and not for the County.
Your attention and consideration in this ratter will be
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely you
rs ,
f5�res 7ankarey
June 19, 1990
REF: FMB2
THE CONTRA COSTA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street
Martinez, . CA 94553
Subject: Rodeo Redevelopment Plan
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board:
Beginning February 20th of this year, there has been an active
effort to establish a portion of the Rodeo community as a
Redevelopment Project Area under the auspices of the County
Redevelopment Agency. To date, there has been a Redevelopment Plan
drafted by the Agency, with an associated report on the plan
submitted by the County Auditor-Controller's office. A draft BIR
has been generated and, with comments from all the interested
parties, has developed into the final EIR report, printed in May of
this year.
There has been an adhoc committee of Rodeo citizens established by
Supervisor Fanden's office to serve as a voice of the Rodeo
community in an advisement capacity to the Redevelopment Agency
during this active process. The Advisory Committee has interacted
with the community to all extent possible and has received comments
and concerns on a variety of subjects.
This letter takes the responsibility of transmitting to the Board of
supervisors the Rodeo Advisory Committee's recommendations regarding
the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan and includes the concerned
conditions of the community.
RSP: FMB2
June 19, 1990
Page Two
The Rodeo Advisory Committee wishes to advise the Board of
Supervisors that redevelopment is a process that is needed in Rodeo
and that a Redevelopment Plan should be adopted, but not without the
registration of several concerns as voiced by the community. The
concerned conditions to date are listed as follows in an
unprioritized manner.
D--1 1. A priority goal of the community in its redevelopment
effort is the facilitation of the downtown/waterfront
revitalization.
By acquisition, assembly, and dissipation of
property;
and by the assistance in financing the
infrastructure and/or improvements to the
downtown/waterfront area.
D-2 2. That the Board mandates that a Citizens' Advisory
Committee be in existence during the length of time that
the plan is in effect, with a charter of open and active
communication be maintained with the community and the
Agency.
D-3 3 . That no redevelopment funds be utilized for any entity or_
project that is, or has intentions of being, funded
through other sources already established.
D--4 4. That the proposed $4.1 million amount estimated for the
adoption of a _government facility be deleted from the
redevelopment schedule and be reallocated for another
redevelopment project use.
D-5 5. That the proposed project of joining California and 7th
Streets for improved circulation not be included in the
Redevelopment Plan.
D-6 6. That the project area be redeveloped along a centralized
theme, if possible, as agreeable to the community.
D-7 7. That a high priority importance be placed on community
utility upgrades such as street, drainage, curb, and
landscaping improvements, etc.
D-8 8. That a high importance of special incentive lending be
established for individual landowners in the project
area.
REF: FMB2
June 19, 1990
Page Three
D-9 9. That the Board be aware that a high degree of
concern is prevalent among the citizens of Rodeo
that individually owned land will be
indiscriminately obtained by the Agency with little
regard for the individuals' right to ownership.
D-10 10. That a measure be addressed and observed to allow
the discontinuance of the Redevelopment Plan at any
time that the community feels that the process has
gone beyond the control and/or goals of the
community.
D-11 11. That the Board offers supreme assurance that the
voice of the community and the Advisory Committee be
held and responded to with absolute respect and
credibility.
D-12 12. That a significant number of citizens are of the
opinion that the process of establishing the plan
has proceeded too fast and without their knowledge.
NOTE: Of the 2,200 certified letters sent to
landowners which most recently generated a
commenting body of 60 (approximately) , 12
persons voted not to agree to the adoption of
the plan as presently written, while 7 voted
to agree to the adoption of the plan as
exists.
In closing, the Rodeo Advisory Committee wishes to inform the Board
the following concern:
The members of the Advisory Committee, at a special meeting
last night, voted 7 to 1 in favor of recommending to the Board
that the plan should be adopted, but with the expressed
inclusion of the above conditions, and if any concerned
conditions be excluded from the plan, that adoption not be
recommended as in the best interest of the Rodeo community.
� VV
Cil
0,4
(11 tp
11 QCA
rL__ .cam�. `� rG - —
c`�
— --.EMi—
ni
--- - - - -C.,Jvv�-t.n - rn`
V '
4�-
40
-46
-- �---- -- — - -- d–r -----
------- --- _ _-�-�---� �1.��sic-�•�J�'�.�,��.���- -- .--- —--
f
V
r
,�_----
.
u c �
P
._---
, H A
90 THU 10139 P . 02
COMMA COSTA
Pamela Peck 2 �� 2.Q�
101 Rodeo Avenue JLN
Rodeo, CA 94572 COPIMUNFtY
(415) 799-3165 CfVELOP,";Z-qTJDEP T
To: 'The Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
re: Rodeo Redevelopment June 19, 1990
Dear Board of Supervisors.
I have been an active member of this ccmrmunity for several years and have
attended most of the meetings on redevelopment in Rodeo. It is obvious that
there is a concensus among the people who live here that before a redevelopment
plan is adopted, the following item.be resolved:
F-1 1. 'That because Rodeo is an unincorporated area, without a city council
or a planning department, it is therefore mandatory that an advisory
committee of Rodeo residents be established and approved by the Board
of Supervisors to work closley with the Redevelopment Agency throughout the
length of the project.
F-2 2. That together, the marina and downtown areas be given priorty; one cannot
develop successfully without the other. And consideration must be given
to the existing businesses and artists that have improved or are currently
improving buildings,downtown, to insure against their displacement.
F-3 3. That the suggested county building be stricken from the plan until specific
uses are determined and discussed with this ccmnunity. , .
F-4 4. 7bat'no money is spent on projects that are currently funded by county
or federal agencies, such as schools, fire department, etc.
F-5 5. That if this corm=ity determines that redevelopment is no longer serving
its needs, then the process would be terminated.
F-6 6. That streets, gutters, lighting and sidewalks be improved, excluding tht!
continuation of California and Seventh Streets.
F-7 7. That Rodeo Creek be restored to enhance and improve the downtown
enjironment and provide a senic thoroughfare linking Viewpoint with • :;e
,main area of town.
If the above mentioned items ca:inot be accomplished thrcugh redeveluprient,
then that process is nc : appropriate for Rodeo.
�bst S'ricerely�
Pamela Peck
cc: Nancy Fallen /
James Kennedy
III . Written Findings and Responses to Written Objections
A. Letter from Lucille Ely, June 11, 1990.
A-1 Comment: The letter objects to the adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan at the current time due to the need
for additional studies. Particularly, the letter objects
to the opening of Seventh Street and California Street
as through streets because this may endanger the lives
of school children. Additionally these streets are not
wide enough to provide sufficient access if through
streets.
Response: The opening of Seventh Street is not part of
the Redevelopment Plan's proposed activities in the
Project Area. The General Plan for the Rodeo Area does
call for the opening of Seventh Street and the EIR
prepared for the Redevelopment Plan considered this
possibility at General Plan buildout, however the Agency
has no plans to participate in this activity under the
proposed Redevelopment Plan.
The California Street extension is also not specifically
part of the Agency's proposed activities, although the
Agency may consider funding of this extension sometime
in the future. Once again the California Street
extension is called for in the General Plan and was
studied in the EIR as a possibility of General Plan
buildout. The Agency has agreed to support a request for
a review of the General Plan policies which call for the
opening of Seventh Street and California Street. In the
event a General Plan amendment is adopted which would
eliminate these street extensions from the General Plan
the Agency would not and could not assist in financing
of these improvements.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
extension of Seventh. Street and California Street are not
projects contemplated in the Redevelopment Plan but
rather are projects called for in the General Plan which
may be developed without Agency assistance or approval.
The Board further finds that the Agency cannot implement
any improvements which are inconsistent with the General
Plan in the event a General Plan amendment is adopted
deleting the extension of Seventh Street and California
Street from the General Plan. Therefore, the Board finds
that the above objection is hereby overruled.
32000N.PS0
06/28/90 -3-
A-2 Comment: The letter calls for a buffer zone between the
Bayo Vista Housing project and the Unocal Refinery.
Response: Currently the property located between the Bayo
Vista Housing Project and the Unocal Refinery is zoned
for light manufacturing which is considered to be a
buffer zoning. The Redevelopment Plan does not change
the land uses in the Project Area but rather adopts the
land uses set out in the General Plan for the Project
Area. The EIR for the Redevelopment Plan as certified
by the Board calls for the retention of buffer zoning for
the property in question as a mitigation measure adopted
by the Board.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Redevelopment Plan does not change the buffer zoning
for the property between the Bayo Vista Housing Project
and the Unocal Refinery and that the EIR for the
Redevelopment Plan requires the Agency and the Board to
use best efforts to retain this buffer zoning.
Therefore, the Board finds that the above objection . is
hereby overruled.
A-3 Comment: The letter objects to the funding of a
government building with tax increment financing and
requests that funding be used for development of Rodeo.
Response: The Agency has removed funding of a government
center. from the Agency's proposed activities for the
Project Area. The Agency had previously allocated $4 . 1
million for the development of a government center in the
Project Area. In order to meet the expressed priority
of the community the Agency has reallocated this $4 . 1
million so that $3 million will be used for commercial
development which may include assistance to businesses
on the waterfront and the remaining $1. 1 million will be
used for community facilities such as parks and open
space improvements. Attached hereto and incorporated
herein is a revised Table 3-1 from the Report on the Plan
reflecting these changes in the Agency's proposed
allocation of tax increment revenues.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds and
determines that the Agency has removed funding of a
government center from its list of proposed activities
in the Report on the Plan. Therefore, the Board finds
that the above objection is hereby overruled.
32000NTS0
06/28/90 -4-
B. Charles Tanksley, June 11, 1990
B-1 Comment: This letter raises the identical objections
raised in letter A above.
Response: See responses to comments A-1, A-2, and A-3 .
Finding: Based on the responses and findings regarding
comments A-1, A-2, and A-3, the Board finds that the
objections contained in letter B are hereby overruled.
C. Dolores Tanksley, June 11, 1990.
C-1 Comment: This letter raises the identical objections
raised in letter A above.
Response: See responses to comments A-1, A-2, and A-3 .
Finding: Based on the responses and findings regarding
comments A-1, A-2, and A-3, the Board finds that the
objections contained in letter C are hereby overruled.
D. Rodeo Advisory Committee, June 19, 1990.
D-1 Comment: The letter transmits the recommendation of the
Rodeo Advisory Committee regarding the Redevelopment
Plan. The Rodeo Advisory Committee believes that
redevelopment is a process that is needed in Rodeo but
it has several concerns that need to be addressed.
First, a priority goal of the Redevelopment Plan would
be facilitation of the downtown/waterfront
revitalization.
- Response: The Redevelopment Plan currently provides for
assistance in the revitalization of the downtown area of
Rodeo. This assistance will take the form of
infrastructure improvements, including street
improvements, sewer and drainage improvements, public
facilities improvements, including open spaces and parks,
and assistance to property owners in the downtown area
with rehabilitation of existing buildings in the area.
Additionally, the Agency may assist in development of
currently vacant parcels in the downtown area by
providing land write downs or other assistance.
The Agency' s plans for the Project Area do not currently
call for waterfront revitalization except as to
assistance with commercial development in the downtown
area. In order to institute a program of waterfront
32000N.P50
06/28/90 -5-
revitalization such as marina development the Agency
would need to prepare extensive environmental studies
regarding the impact of development on the biological
resources existing in the area. To date the Agency has
not prepared such studies since no specific plans for
development of the waterfront have been put forward. The
Agency may consider assisting in revitalization of the
waterfront at some future date. At such time the Agency
will need to amend the Redevelopment Plan and prepare
appropriate environmental documentation on such
development in conjunction with consultation with federal
and state regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over
waterways and wetlands.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Redevelopment Plan provides for revitalization of the
downtown area. The Board further finds that development
of the waterfront is in the interest of the community but
that additional studies will be required before the
Agency can undertake development of the waterfront. The
Board hereby directs the Agency to begin pursuing such
studies as are necessary to include waterfront
development in the Redevelopment Plan including amendment
of the Redevelopment Plan if necessary. Based on the
foregoing, the Board finds that the above objections are
hereby overruled.
D-2 Comment: The Rodeo Advisory Committee requests that the
Board mandate that the committee remain in existence
throughout the term of the plan in order to maintain open
communication with the community regarding implementation
of the Redevelopment Plan.
Response: In conjunction with adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan, the Agency is requesting that the
Board establish the Rodeo Advisory Committee whose charge
shall be to assist the Agency in undertaking
redevelopment in the Project Area over the term of the
Redevelopment Plan.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Rodeo Advisory Committee has been duly formed and
constituted in order to assist in redevelopment of the
Project Area over the life of the Redevelopment Plan.
Therefore, the Board finds that the above objection is
hereby overruled.
D-3 Comment: The Rodeo Advisory Committee requests that no
redevelopment funds be utilized for any entity or project
32000N.P50
06/28/90 -6-
that is or has intentions of being funded through other
sources.
Response: The Agency's activities in the Project Area
call for the funding a variety of programs. For the most
part these programs will not be funded through other
.sources which is why the Agency's assistance is required.
However in some instances Agency assistance may be
required for projects which have received funding from
other sources but which do not have sufficient funds to
complete the activity or program. The Agency assistance
represents for such projects last resort funding which
is necessary to complete the project. Without the Agency
assistance the improvements and projects would not go
forward. Thus, the Agency may in fact, as a last resort,
participate in projects which have received funding from
other sources.
Finding: Based on the foregoing the Board finds that the
Agency will not fund activities which have received
funding from other sources unless such funding is
necessary to complete the activity. Therefore, the Board
finds that the above objection is hereby overruled.
D-4 Comment: The Rodeo Advisory Committee requests that the
funding for the government center be eliminated from the
Agency' s activities.
Response: As stated in the response to comment A-3 the
Agency has deleted funding for the government center from
it budget of activities.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Agency has deleted funding of the government center
from is activities. Therefore, the Board finds that the
above objection is hereby overruled.
D-5 Comment: The Rodeo Advisory Committee requests that
extensions of California Street and 7th Street not be
included in the Redevelopment Plan.
Response: See response to comment A-1.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
extension of Seventh Street and California Street are not
projects contemplated in the Redevelopment Plan but
rather are projects called for in the General Plan which
may be developed without Agency assistance or approval.
The Board further finds that the Agency cannot implement
32000N.P50
06/28/90 -7-
any improvements which are inconsistent with the General
Plan in the event a General Plan amendment is adopted
deleting the extension of Seventh Street and California
Street from the General Plan. Therefore, the Board finds
that the above objection is hereby overruled.
D-6 Comment: The Rodeo Advisory Committee request that the
Project Area be developed along a centralized theme.
Response: The Agency's plans for development in the
Project Area anticipate a unified development to be
determined in conjunction with planning studies to be
developed by consultants working with the Agency staff,
Rodeo business community and Rodeo citizens generally.
The studies will look to provide an overall development
plan for the Project Area which can be implemented with
the Agency' s assistance. The community will be consulted
prior to the development of such a plan in order to
ensure that the plan reflects the community's desires for
the Project Area.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Agency intends to develop the Project Area pursuant
to a unified development plan. Therefore, the Board
finds that the above objection is hereby overruled.
D-7 Comment: The Committee requests that a high priority
importance be placed on community utility upgrades such
as street, drainage, curb and landscaping improvements.
Response: The Redevelopment Plan currently includes
community utility upgrades in the proposed activities.
The improvements will include street improvements,
landscaping of street frontages, drainage improvements
and installation of curbs, gutters and sidewalks. These
improvements are an integral part of the Agency's plans
for revitalization of the area and will be accorded high
priority in the Agency's plans.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
community utility upgrades are of high importance in the
Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, the Board finds that the
above objection is hereby overruled.
D-8 Comment: The Committee requests that a high importance
of special incentive lending be established for
landowners in the Project Area.
Response: The Redevelopment Plan currently provides for
32000N.P50
06/28/90 -$-
assistance to property owners in the Project Area in two
ways. First,. - the Redevelopment Plan contemplates the
establishment of, a housing rehabilitation loan program
for Project Area residents which would provide low
interest rate loans to property owners in order to assist
them in improving their properties. Secondly, the
Redevelopment Plan contemplates assisting owners of
commercial properties. with rehabilitation of their
properties. -
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Redevelopment Plan places a high importance on
assistance to property owners in the Project Area.
Therefore, the Board finds that the above objection is
hereby overruled.
D-9 Comment: The Committee wishes to apprise the Board of
the high degree of concern among citizens of Rodeo that
privately owned land will be taken by the Agency.
Response: Although the Redevelopment Plan grants to the
Agency the right of eminent domain, the Agency' s plans
for the Project Area minimize . the potential for the
exercise of this power. Additionally, prior to the
exercise of this power the Agency will be required to
follow State law requirements regarding property
acquisition which require that property owners be given
the chance to be heard prior to the exercise of the power
of eminent - domain. Finally, as indicated above, the
Board has established the Rodeo Advisory Committee to
assist the Agency in undertaking redevelopment of the
Project Area. The Agency will consult with this
committee " prior to exercising any powers of eminent
-- domain and the committee's concerns will be taken into
account.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Agency's power of eminent domain will be exercised
judiciously and with restraint. Therefore, the Board
finds that the above objection is hereby overruled.
D-10 Comment: The Committee requests that a measure be
addressed to allow for discontinuance of the
Redevelopment Plan at any time that the community feels
that the process has gone beyond the control of the
community.
Response: The Agency's or the Board's ability to
terminate the Redevelopment Plan prior to the expiration
32000N.P50
06/28/90 -9-
of its term is governed by State law. Under the
Community Redevelopment Law the process for terminating
a plan is similar to the process for amending the plan.
In order to terminate the Agency would propose an
amendment to terminate. The Agency would have to prepare
the necessary documents to effectuate such a termination
and the Agency and the Board would be required to hold
a public hearing on such a termination. The Board would
be required to approve such a termination. Under the
resolution establishing the Rodeo Advisory Committee
recommendation of termination of the Redevelopment Plan
to the Agency would be an appropriate action. The Agency
would be required to bring such a recommendation to the
Board if the Agency determines that such a recommendation
can be implemented at the time.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the power to terminate the Redevelopment Plan is governed
by State law but that the Agency may, abide by a
recommendation to terminate if such a recommendation can
be carried out at the time presented. Therefore, the
Board finds that the above objection is hereby overruled.
D-11 Comment: The Committee requests assurance from the board
that the committee will listened to and responded to on
matters regarding redevelopment in the Project Area.
Response: The Board has established the Rodeo Advisory
Committee to assist and advise the Agency in undertaking
redevelopment of the Project Area. In this role the
Board fully expects that the Committee' s opinions will
be given full credence and respect. The Board has a long
term commitment to community participation in
development and the Board fully intends to meet this
commitment with regard to the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Rodeo Advisory Committee's concerns will be heard and
respected with regards to implementation of the
Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, the Board finds that the
above objection is hereby overruled.
D-12 Comment: The Committee is concerned that the adoption
process for the Redevelopment Plan has proceeded too fast
and without the knowledge of the residents of the area.
Response: The Agency began the process for adoption of
the Redevelopment Plan in September, 1989 with the
32000NT50
06/28/90 -10-
i
adoption of a survey area. Since that time the. Agency
has prepared , numerous studies on the Project Area
including an Environmental Impact Report, all of which
have been available to the public. Additionally, the
Agency has consulted with the Rodeo Advisory Committee
throughout the adoption of the Plan and has held numerous
community meetings in order to elicit community input on
the Redevelopment Plan. All of the Agency's meeting have
been noticed in the local newspaper. Additionally, every
property owner in the Project Area received notice of the
public hearing held by the Board and the Agency on the
Redevelopment Plan.
Findinq: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Agency has proceeded ' with adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan in a manner which has maximized
community input and participation. Therefore, the Board
finds that the above objection is hereby overruled.
E. Andree Cargile.
E-1 Comment: The letter requests the permanent establishment
of the Rodeo Advisory Committee to advise the Agency on
implementation of the Redevelopment Plan.
Response: See response to comment D-2 regarding the
permanent establishment of the Rodeo Advisory Committee.
Finding: The . Board finds that the Rodeo Advisory
Committee has been permanently established to advise the
Agency on redevelopment of the Project Area. Therefore,
the Board. finds that the above objection is hereby
overruled:
E-2 Comment: The comment requests that the Agency work
toward development of the marina area so that Rodeo can
become a thriving community centering on its recreational
commercial waterfront. The waterfront can become a
source of pride to the County and the residents of Rodeo.
Response: See response to Comment D-1 regarding
development of the waterfront.
Finding: See the Board's finding with respect to comment
D-1.
F. Pamela Peck, June 19, 1990.
F-1 Comment: The comment request the formation of the Rodeo
32000N.P50
06/29/90 "11-
Advisory Committee on a permanent basis to advise the
Agency on implementation of the Plan.
Response: See response to comment D-2.
Finding: See the Board's finding with respect to comment
D-2 .
F-2 Comment: The comment requests that development of the
downtown and the marina be given priority and that
consideration be given to existing businesses.
Response: See response to comment D-1 with regards to
development of the downtown and the waterfront. The
Redevelopment Plan does give consideration to existing
businesses and their retention in the area. The
Redevelopment Plan includes programs to provide financial
assistance to existing businesses to improve their
facilities. Additionally, the Redevelopment Plan
includes infrastructure improvements throughout the
Project Area that will benefit existing businesses.
Finding: Based on the foregoing the Board finds that the
Redevelopment Plan gives consideration to existing
businesses. Therefore, the Board finds that the above
objection with regards to existing businesses is hereby
overruled. With regards to the comment regarding
downtown and marina development see the Board' s finding
regarding comment D-1.
F-3 Comment: The comment requests that the county government
center be deleted from the Redevelopment Plan.
Response: See response to comment A-3 .
Finding: See the Board's finding with respect to comment
A-3 .
F-4 Comment: The comment requests that no money be spent on
projects that are currently funded from other sources.
Response: See response to comment D-3.
Finding: See the Board' s finding with respect to Comment
D-3 .
F-5 Comment: The comment requests that if the community
determines that redevelopment is no longer serving the
32000N.PS0
06/28/90 -12-
1
needs of the community it be terminated.
Response: See response to comment D-10.
Finding: See the Board's finding with respect to Comment
D-10.
F-6 Comment: The comment requests that streets, lighting and
sidewalks be improved.
Response: See response to comment D-7 .
Finding: See the Board's finding with respect to comment
D-7.
F-7 Comment: The comment requests that the Rodeo Creek be
restored to enhance and improve the downtown and to
provide a scenic thoroughfare linking Viewpointe with the
downtown.
Response: The Agency's plans for the Project Area
include restoration of the Rodeo Creek area including
development of pathways providing pedestrian and bicycle
access to the creekway. Additionally, as indicated in
the response to comment A-3, the Agency has allocated an
additional $1. 1 million for community facilities that
will be used in part to enhance open spaces, including
the Rodeo Creek Area.
Finding: Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that
the Agency's plans for the Project Area include
restoration of the Rodeo Creek area. Therefore, the
Board finds that the above objection is hereby overruled.
32000N.PS0
06/28/90 -13-
III-I
RODEO
PROPOSED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
AND
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED COSTS
1. EMPLOYMENT GENERATING LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
A. Rehabilitation and Enhancement 3,500,000
B.. New Construction 2,500,000
$6,000,000
2. CIRCULATION AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
A. Parker Avenue (Willow Avenue to San Pablo Avenue) 2,130,000
B. Interchange at Willow, Parker and San Pablo Avenues 500,000
C. Other Improvements 2,470,000
D. Overhead Pedestrian Bridge - From Parker Avenue to Marina 300,000
E. Street Frontage Improvements 1,000,000
Subtotal $6,400,000
3. PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES
A. Schools 1,000,000
B. Neighborhood Parks 1,200,000
C. Other Public/Community Facilities 111001000
Subtotal $ 3,300,000
4. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
A. Storm Drainage Improvements 2,500,000
B. Other Infrastructure 530,000
Subtotal $ 3,030,000
TOTAL $18,730,000
say $19,000,000
Administration and Contingency @ 15% $ 2,850,000
$21,850,000
For purposes of feasibility analysis, say $22,000,000
RECORDED AT THE RNQL= OF
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, CA 94553
Ordinance No. 90-50
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA
COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RODEO REDEVELOPMENT
PRUJDCT PURSUANT TO THE CCHMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT' LAW
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Section I Preliminary Statement
The Contra Costa County Redevelcpwant Agency (herein referred to as
"Agency") has made studies of the location, physical condition of structures,
environmental influences, land use and social, economic and cultural conditions
of that certain area ]mown' as the Rodeo Redevelcpament Project Area, more
particularly described on the attached Wu bit A and hereinafter referred to as
the "Project Area", and has determined that the Project Area is a blighted area
and is detrimental to the safety, health and welfare of the users thereof and of
the County of Contra Costa at large because of:
a. Economic dislocation, deterioration or disuse resulting from blighting
physical, social, and economic conditions.
b. The ineffective, uneconomic and unproductive use of land due to the
existence of lots of inappropriate size, configuration or placement and in-
appropriate access to vehicular traffic and utilities necessary to allow private
development.
C. The continuing problem of poor traffic and circulation patterns.
d. The existence of inadequate infrastructure, public improvements,
public facilities, neighborhood open spaces and utilities which cannot be
remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment.
e. The existence of residential and commercial structures characterized by
age, obsolescence, deterioration, dilapidation, vacancy of buildings and mixed
and shifting uses.
f. The existence of excessive vacant land on which structures were
previously located, abandoned and vacant buildings, substandard structures,
vacancies and delinquencies in payment of real property taxes.
g. . The existence of inadequate drainage facilities resulting in localized
flooding.
h. The existence of abandoned and/or deteriorated buildings due to lack
of maintenance and upkeep.
Pursuant to the California Cmmunity Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety
Code Section 33000 et sea. (hereinafter referred to as the "Redevelopment Law") ,
the Agency has prepared and submitted to the Board of Supervisors for review and
adoption the Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") for the Project (the "Project") .
The plan consists of thirty-one (31) pages, two (2) maps, and one (1) exhibit
and is incorporated in this Ordinance by this reference. A copy of the Plan is
on file with the Clerk of the Board.
The Contra Costa County Planning Commission, which is the duly designated
and acting official planning body of Contra Costa County, has submitted to the
Board of Supervisors its report and recoamnendation dated June 12, 1990
reooarnnending approval and adoption of the Plan and has certified that the Plan
conforms to the General Plan for the County.
90-50
f. y
The Plan for the Project Area prescribes certain land uses for the Area and
may require, among other things, changes in zoning, the vacating arra removal of
streets of record and other public rights of way, the establishment of new
street patterns, the location of sewers, water mains, lighting and utility lines
and other public facilities.
The Agency has prepared and submitted and the Board of Supervisors has
reviewed and considered the Report on the Plan pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33352.
The Agency has prepared and submitted to the Board of Supervisors a
program for the relocation of individuals and families that may be displaced as
a result of implementing the Plan.
The Board of Supervisors is cognizant of the conditions that are imposed in
the undertaking and implementation of redevelopment projects under State law,
including those prohibiting discrimination because of race, color, creed,
religion, sex, marital status, national origin or ancestry.
The Agency has prepared and submitted to the Board of Supervisors for
review and certification an Environmental Imypact Report (HEIR") prepared
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended
("CEQA") , the Official State Guidelines as amended, for the implementation of
the Act (the "State EIR Guidelines") , and the Contra Costa County Guidelines for
Administering CEQA (the "County Guidelines") . A copy of the EIR is on file with
the Clerk of the Board. The Planning Commission has submitted to the Board and
Agency a resolution dated June 12, 1990 recc mrnending certification of the EIR.
By concurrent resolution adopted prior to the adoption of this Ordinance,
the Board of Supervisors and the Agency has certified that the EIR has been
completed in rcopliance with C BQA, the State EIR CLidelines and the County
Guidelines; that the EIR adequately addresses the environmental issues of the
Project and the Plan; and that the Board of Supervisors and the Agency have
reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR prior to
approving the Project and the Plan. The concurrent resolution also identifies
the significant effects of the Project and the Plan. The concurrent resolution
also identifies the significant effects of the Project and the Plan, adopts
mitigation measures, and monitoring programs therefore; and makes certain
findings and statements in compliance with Sections 15091, 15092 and 15093 of the
State EIR Guidelines.
Prior to adoption of the Plan, the Board of Supervisors and the Agency have
conducted a joint public hearing which was duly noticed in accordance with the
requirements of the Redevelopment Law.
At or prior to the joint public hearing on the Plan, the Board and the
Agency received certain written objections to the Plan. Prior to the
introduction of this Ordinance, 'by Board Resolution No. 90/446 dated July
10, 1990, and pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33363, the Board
prepared its responses and findings (the "Findings") in writing to all written
objections it received in connection with consideration of adoption of the Plan.
Section II Findings & Determinations
Based upon the evidence contained in the Report on the Plan, the EIR , the
findings and other documents prepared in the Plan adoption process and on
evidence presented at the public hearing, it is hereby found and determined
that:
a. The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is
necessary to effectuate the public purposes declared in, and it qualifies as an
eligible area under, the Redevelopment Law (see particularly Part II of the
Report on the Plan regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
b. The Plan conforms to the General Plan of the County of Contra Costa
(see particularly Part VI of the Report on the Plan regarding evidence with
respect to this finding) .
C. The Plan would redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the
Redevelopment Law and would be in the interest of the public peace, health,
safety and welfare; and the implementation of the Plan would promote the public
peace, health, safety and welfare of Contra Costa County, and would effectuate
the purposes and policy of the Redevelopment law (see particularly Parts I and
II of the Report on the Plan regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
90-50
d. The adoption and implementation of the Plan is economically sound and
feasible (see particularly Part III of the Report on the Plan regarding evidence
with respect to this finding) .
e. The Plan will afford max;m►m, opportunity, consistent with the sound
needs of the contra- Costa County, as a whole, for the redevelopment of the
Project Area by private enterprise (see particularly Parts I and II of the
Report on the Plan and the Agency's adopted Rules for Owner Participation and
Business Tenant Preference regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
f. The Plan and the program for the proper relocation of individuals and
families, if any, displaced in carrying out the Plan in decent, safe, and
sanitary dwellings in conformity with acceptable standards (as set forth in Part
iv of the Report on the Plan) are feasible and can be reasonably and timely
effected to permit the proper prosecution and completion of the Plan; and such
dwellings or dwelling units available or to be made available to such displaced
individuals and families are at least equal in number to the number of displaced
individuals and families, are not generally less desirable in regard to public
utilities and public and commercial facilities than the dwellings of the
displaced individuals and families in the Project Area, are available at rents
or prices within the financial means of the displaced individuals and families
and are reasonably accessible to their places of employment (see particularly
Parts II, IV and XII of the Report on the Plan and the Agency's Adopted
Relocation Guidelines regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
g. The Board of Supervisors is satisfied that permanent housing
facilities will be available within three years from the time occupants of the
Project Area, if any, are displaced and that pending the development of such
facilities there will be available to such displaced occupants housing
facilities at rents comparable to those in the community at the time of their
displacement (see particularly Part II, IV and XII of the Report on the Plan
regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
h. The Project Area contains property suitable for low and
moderate-inccme housing (see particularly Part II of the Report on the Plan
regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
i. The Project Area includes approximately 650 acres, and there are no
noncontiguous areas contained in the Project Area (see particularly Part II of
the Report on the Plan regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
j. The inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements which are not
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare are necessary for the
effective redevelopment of the Project Area of which they are a part and are not
included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues
from such are pursuant to Section 33670 without other substantial justification
for their inclusion (see particularly Parts I and II of the Report on the Plan
regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
k. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Plan
hereby approved and adopted, certain official action must be taken by this Board
of Supervisors with reference, among other things, to changes and modifications
in zoning, the vacation and removal of streets, alleys, and other public ways,
the establishment of new street patterns, the location of sewer and water mains,
lighting and utility lines and other public facilities and other public action,
and accordingly, the Board hereby (i) pledges its cooperation in helping to
implement the Plan; (ii) requests the various officials, departments, boards and
agencies of the County having administrative responsibilities in the Project
Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective
functions and powers in a manner consistent with the Plan; (iii) stands ready to
consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and measures designed to
effectuate the Plan; (iv) intends to undertake and complete any proceedings
necessary to be implemented by the community under the provisions of the Plan.
1. The elimination of blight and redevelopment of the Project Area could
not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone
without the aid and assistance of the Agency (see particularly the Introduction
and Parts II and III of the Report on the Plan regarding evidence with respect
to this finding) .
90-50
M. The condemnation of real property, if any, is necessary to the
execution of the Plan and adequate provisions have been made for payment of
property to be acquired as provided by law (see particularly Part II of the
Report on the Plan regarding evidence with respect to this finding) .
n. The Agency and the County have agreed to enter into certain fiscal
agreements with affected taxing agencies pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33401(b) (the "Fiscal Agreements") . The Agency will also implement
other fiscal mitigation measures as described in Part XI of the Report on the
Plan. The effect of tax increment financing, as mitigated by the Fiscal
Agreements and other fiscal mitigation measures set forth in the Report on the
Plan, will not cause significant financial burden on or detriment to any taxing
agency deriving revenues from the tax increment Project Area (see particularly
Parts II, IX, X, and XI of the Report on the Plan regarding evidence with
respect to this finding) .
o. The development of the public improvements set forth in the Plan are
of benefit to the Project Area and to the iitnnediate neighborhood in which the
Project is located; no other reasonable means of financing such improvements are
available to the coamunity; and, based on these findings, the Agency is
authorized to pay all or a part of the value of the land for and the cost of the
installation and construction of the public improvements set forth in the Plan,
as permitted by Health and Safety Code Section 33445 (see particularly the
Introduction and Parts II, III, and VI of the Report on the Plan regarding
evidence with respect to this finding) . All written and oral objections to the
Plan are hereby overruled. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section
33363, the reasons for overruling all written objections are more fully set
forth in the Findings.
Section III Overruling of Objections
All written and oral objections to the Plan are hereby overruled. In
accordance with Health & Safety Code Section 33363, the reasons for overruling
all written objections are more fully set forth in the Findings.
Sec.-tion IV Approval of Plan
The Plan for the Project Area, having been duly received and considered, is
approved and adopted, and the Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to file a
copy of the Plan with the minutes of this meeting. The Plan, which contains,
among other elements, the statement of purpose and intent of the Board of
supervisors with respect to the Project Area, is incorporated in this Ordinance
by reference. The Plan is hereby designated as an official Redevelopment Plan
for the Project Area. . It is the purpose and intent of this Board and the Agency
be implemented in the Project Area.
A copy of this Ordinance shall be transmitted to the Agency and the Agency
is vested with the responsibility of implementing the Plan
Section V Effective Date
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from the date of its
passage and adoption, this Ordinance shall be published once in the West County
Times, a newspaper of general circulation published and printed in Contra Costa
County within 15 days of its adoption.
Passed on July 10, 1990.
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Fanden
NOES: None
ABSTAIN:None
ABSENT: None
CMM
ATTESTED: PHIL BATCHELOR, CL EM (seal)
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
OMM ADMINISTRATOR
BY
Deputy
ra48/rodeo.ord
90-50
W11�11
• t�d`��la� 1
�t�oL 4L0 .,.. .. ..
rr. •
t4
i �
_
t •1
Vrgr
c
� J
�M �f
a'' J
SVSML.•r •~i
�� t.•.... •rt r r •• S
r
i ~
Lal • •'+rY�'^�`i. • ` : '.iC� tt j L �\�• �G�4
tOVSMtM~ �` • a .•�a ty , t 31S 1'1 ` ."9!' ' `� td i•
►GVK. •� ' t i of � •.�i. _ f
\ st t• • + + •` ...L�+-�i Lam'• .. y ,jam r � a.a�aa• is
r��y fo'• �'i 'Y a �'�S" 'e. � 1 s' t M"r\�.t'"' •. ». 1 t� � wt}Y •
Jill
r �
• + .tel. '�y/�"�� .•� •!''�'� ',`r .! r••a1 t � •4 • .�'"•
' .1� '. .• N \iy.,'r� ,•. ^ • .. • •► � *ii{\s'.3� r\ t J� .�. tie may.
• .•� �i '•�� L'ty-� �, a,• .. •moo to •
.. ♦" ^; *» r •{ ✓ •,, `l � i,Jam.r
o
h
J� �, as�_ �•' � 4.��"+.p'•• )'�_ir`_• < �?F�~ � • •
°° %\+o , � tea'; ~ `,� • • •:1~� � � �•
9p-5�
6212 /
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra ,
FROM: Phil Batchelor ' (JWLC�
County
Administrator ``�s-,-q�o--�• Cw
DATE: July 10, 1990
SUBJECT: Establishing a Redevelopment Advisory Committee for the
Rodeo Redevelopment Project Area
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Establish an eleven member Redevelopment Advisory Committee for the
Rodeo Redevelopment Project area over the term of the Redevelopment
Plan whose charge shall be to assist and advise the Redevelopment
Agency in undertaking redevelopment in the Rodeo Project Area.
.Membership eligibility shall conform to "Project Area Committee
Guidelines" adopted by the Redevelopment Agency on July 11, 1989.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The Contra Costa Board of Supervisors, by Resolution No. 89/736, on
November 14, 1989, determined that Redevelopment Agency staff with
residents and community organizations during the process of
adopting the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan. It was the intent of the
staff to work with the R-10 Citizens Advisory Committee
supplemented by other community representatives,. in an ex-officio
manner to conduct the community consultation.
Upon the adoption of the Rodeo Redevelopment Plan on July 10, 1990,
the . Board expressed its desire to formally establish a
Redevelopment Advisory Committee for the Rodeo Redevelopment
Project Area. Staff is recommending that an eleven member
Redevelopment Advisory Committee for Rodeo be established. The
Committee should have a balance of interests represented.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: !,D
koogtX 5v
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECO14MENDAT OF BO COMM TE
APPROVE OTHER
I
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION ,OF BOARD ON July 10 , 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
cc: Community Development ATTESTED July 10, 1990
PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CO Y ADMINISTRATOR.
ra47/rodrac.bos BY , DEPUTY