HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06091992 - 1.33 ~, 4
. S- m 33
/yi
Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Costa
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON ^' '
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'T, C ,;
ry
DATE: May 28, 1992
SUBJECT: Cypress Lakes Contractual Services Agreement-2918-RZ; DP 3032-90; SUB
7562-Hotchkiss Tract Area.
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZE the Director of Community Development to execute the
contractual agreement to prepare the Environmental Impact Report
for 2918-RZ; DP 3032-90 and Subdivision 7562 .
FISCAL IMPACT
None. The applicant for the project, Three Sisters Trust already
committed the necessary funding for the EIR costs ($101, 650,. 0,0') .,
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The County is processing a request to rezone the approximately 683
acre site from General Agriculture (A-2) and Heavy Agriculture (A-
3) to Planned Unit Development (P-1) (2918-RZ) , and to develop the
site into 1, 301 single family lots, with open space, recreational
amenities, school site, fire station and child care center (3032-
90) , and a vesting tentative map to subdivide the site into 1, 301
single family lots (SUB7562) .
The Cypress Lakes project site is located in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta area of unincorporated north-eastern Contra Costa
County, approximately 2 . 7 miles east of the Town of Oakley. The
project site is located at the junction of Cypress Road and Bethel
Island Road and is generally bordered by Bethel Island Road on the
west, and Sandmound Boulevard on the north and east. Rock Slough
is located one-half mile south of the site.
The Engineer for the project is Bohley & Mahley, Inc.
An initial environmental study has been prepared indic ting the
project may have significant environmental impacts.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATUR
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OFIAOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ONAPPROVED 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.
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED /9 9�-
cc: Public Works Department PHIL BA HELOR, CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
/SAND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
2918-rz.bo BY !% � , DEPUTY
AB/df
Page Two
Public Affairs Management has been selected to prepare an
Environmental Impact Report. Attached is the consultants proposal
for the preparations of the EIR and cost estimate (Exhibit A) .
Also attached is a vicinity map showing the site's location
(Exhibit B) .
1.33
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF WORK FOR PREPARATION
OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
CYPRESS LAKES AND COUNTRY CLUB PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
APRIL 9, 1992
PREPARED BY:
-PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGEMENT
101 THE EMBARCADERO, SUITE 210
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105
(415) 989-1446
SCOPE OF WORK FOR PREPARATION
OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
CYPRESS LAKES AND COUNTRY CLUB PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
A. UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 1
B. AWARENESS OF PUBLIC AGENCY AND COMMUNITY INTERESTS 1
C. PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACH 2
D. KEY PERSONNEL 3
E. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE 5
F. KEY ISSUES 5
G. SCOPE OF WORK 8
H. SCHEDULE AND LIST OF PRODUCTS 26
I . COST PROPOSAL 28
J. SUMMARY LIST OF LETTERS IN RESPONSE 29
TO THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION
EXHIBIT A: TIME AND MATERIALS RATES
A. UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT
As the Lead Agency for the proposed Cypress Lakes and Country
Club project, the Contra Costa County Community Development
Department has determined through the preparation of an Initial
Study of the proposed project that an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) is required for the project to comply with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .
The Cypress Lakes and Country Club project site is located in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area of unincorporated north-eastern
Contra Costa County approximately 2 . 7 miles east of the Town of
Oakley. The project site is located in the off-island portion of
the Bethel Island Area, commonly known as the Hotchkiss Tract .
The existing use of the site is agricultural (cattle grazing) .
The Cypress Lakes and Country Club project would be constructed
on approximately 683 acres consisting of five parcels . The
project would consist of 1, 301 single-family residential units
divided into eleven neighborhoods . In addition, the project
would include a 18-hole golf course with amenities, swim and
tennis club, man-made lakes, recreational vehicle/boat storage, a
day care facility, parks and open space.
The proposed residential development would be on lots ranging in
size from approximately 3, 600 square feet to 8, 000 square feet .
Residential lot densities would range from a low of 3 . 7 lots per
acre to a high of 8 . 0 lots per acre. The overall density of the
project is 1 . 9 units per acre.
Residential development on the southern portion of the site
(south of Cypress Road) would include two man-made lakes
surrounding the neighborhoods to provide a lake-front living
environment . The residential development north of Cypress Road
would include a 18-hole golf course interwoven among the various
neighborhoods .
The project also includes a wetland mitigation area to mitigate
the project' s impacts on wetland areas . (note: The project site
contains approximately 9 . 18 acres of wetlands . The project would
avoid 8 . 23 acres and would mitigate 0 . 95 acres through the
creation of replacement wetlands)
B. AWARENESS OF PUBLIC AGENCY AND COMMUNITY INTERESTS
Public Affairs Management has reviewed information on the history
of the project site and is familiar with the various community
interests regarding development in the Bethel Island area . We
expect that many of the same community groups and environmental
organizations involved with the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan
will also participate in the review of the proposed project .
1
Some of the groups include:
• Bethel Island Area Association
• Greenbelt Alliance
• Mount Diablo Audubon Society
• Sierra Club (San Francisco Bay Chapter)
In addition, the following public agencies were notified during
the NOP process and/or are expected to be involved in the EIR
review:
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District
• State of California, Department of Fish and Game
• State of California, State Lands Commission
• State of California, Department of Food and Agriculture
• State of California, Department of Water Resources
• State of California, Water Resources Control Board
• State of California, Reclamation Board
• State of California, Air Resources Board
• State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation
• State of California, Department of Conservation, Division of
Mines and Geology
• State of California, Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Native American Heritage Commission
• U. S Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
• U. S . Fish and Wildlife Service
C. PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACH
The project management approach will focus on strict
interpretations of the CEQA and local processing procedures and
regulations . Close interagency coordination will be a key
element of our approach. The Public Affairs Management team will
work closely with County staff and the applicant' s
representatives as appropriate .
2
I
D. KEY PERSONNEL
Kay Wilson, President of Public Affairs Management, will be the
Principal in Charge of the project . Ms . Wilson has over 20 years
of experience processing environmental documents subject to CEQA
and NEPA and has managed the preparation of well over 60 EIRs for
residential projects in California.
Brian Kennedy, Project Manager/Senior Planner, will be the
Project Manager for the project . Mr. Kennedy has managed the
preparation of numerous environmental documents and has recent
and relevant experience with EIR' s for Contra Costa County and
local communities . Mr. Kennedy is thoroughly familiar with the
technical analysis requirements for this project and has
successfully prepared analyses for similar projects .
Scott L. Steinwert, Environmental Planner, will be the project
planner for the project . Mr. Steinwert has prepared numerous
environmental studies and has recent and relevant experience with
EIRs for Contra Costa County and local communities .
In addition, Public Affairs Management will utilize the following
technical subconsultants : Charles M. Salter Associates (Noise) ;
Don Ballanti (Air Quality) ; Abrams Associates (Traffic) ; and,
William Self Associates (Cultural Resources) .
The following presents a summary of the principal personnel
committed to participate in this project and their
responsibilities :
STAFF PERSON RESPONSIBILITY
Kay A. Wilson Principal in Charge
President Project Reviewer
Public Affairs Management
Brian Kennedy Project Manager
Senior Planner
Public Affairs Management
Scott L. Steinwert Land Use, Population, Geology
Environmental Planner Plant/Animal Life, Utilities,
Aesthetics, Cumulative
Impacts, Alternatives and
others Issues
Charlie Abrams Traffic
Traffic Engineer
Abrams Associates
3
Alan Rosen Noise
Senior Consultant
Charles M. Salter Associates
Don Ballanti Air Quality
Certified Consulting Meteorologist
William Self Cultural Resources
Archaeologist
William Self Associates
4
E. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Public Affairs Management' s overall environmental and planning
capabilities are on file with the County. Public Affairs
Management has been or is currently involved in environmental
analysis for several projects in Contra Costa County including
the State Route 4/Bailey Road Interchange; Fostoria Way
Overcrossing in San Ramon; Interstate 580/Schaefer Road
Interchange in West Dublin; and, the proposed BART Extension in
West Contra Costa County. In addition, Public Affairs Management
has conducted planning and environmental analysis for both public
and private sector clients involving similar large scale
residential projects .
Representative residential projects include Black Oaks Estates
and Wiedemann Ranch in Contra Costa County; Madera del Presidio
in the Town of Corte Madera; Meadowview Oaks in Placer County;
and Vintage Oaks Residential Community in Menlo Park.
F. KEY ISSUES
The Initial Study released by Contra Costa County identified
several areas requiring analysis in the EIR. Some of the key
issues include:
• Impacts on flooding as a result of levee construction and
related water quality issues;
• Traffic congestion and safety on local roadways and the need
for improvements based on updated conditions;
• Conformance of the proposed project with the policies and
development regulations of Measure C and the new County
General Plan (January 1991) ;
• Impacts on plant and animal life, especially wetland
habitats;
• Noise impacts along Cypress Road and other local streets;
• Impacts on public services; and,
• Impacts resulting from the loss of agricultural land.
5
G. SCOPE OF WORK
The following scope of work presents the basic tasks necessary to
prepare the required EIR and elaborates on various approaches and
methodologies unique to this proposal .
The work on the EIR shall be divided into Phases I, II and III :
Phase I : Preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR.
Phase II : Preparation of the Draft EIR.
Phase III : Preparation of the Administrative Final and Final
EIR.
The tasks within these phases are outlined below.
�Y
PHASE I: PREPARATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DRAF!I EIR
The preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR shall be prepared
to meet all applicant CEQA requirements and related guidelines
implemented by Contra Costa County. The EIR will include the
following sections and appropriate environmental analyses .
Preface
The EIR will include a preface that introduces the reader to the
EIR process in general and how the currently proposed project
relates to the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan and Contra Costa
County General Plan.
Summary
The summary of the EIR will include a brief narrative that
describes the proposed project and a summary table of the impacts
and mitigation measures addressed in the EIR for the proposed
project . The summary table will clarify the significance of each
impact with and without implementation of the proposed and
recommended mitigation measures . As suggested in the CEQA
Guidelines, the narrative summary will describe the areas of
public controversy, issues to be resolved, comparative analysis
of the project alternatives, and a brief description of the
discretionary actions required for implementation of the proposed
project .
6
Project Description
The project description in the EIR (physical improvements : homes,
streets, recreation amenities, etc. , and construction methods)
will be based on the Project Description contained in the Initial
Study with any additional design information provided by County
staff and the project applicant, as necessary. The terms of the
existing Development Agreement will be described and all
mitigation measures proposed by the applicant will be listed.
Impact Analysis and Mitigation
The EIR will address a variety of impact issues . The following
scope of work descriptions are based on the analyses provided in
the Initial Study for the project and the issues raised by the
letters in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) . A
summary list of the letters in Response to the NOP is provided in
Section J.
A number of policy documents and technical analyses will be
utilized to define the project, assess impacts and define project
specific mitigation measures . These documents and analyses will
be provided by Contra Costa County, the applicant and/or the
applicant' s consultants and will be independently assessed with
respect to the currently proposed project . The focus of the EIR
is to summarize the project impacts and set forth specific
mitigation for project related impacts . In addition, Mitigation
Measures will be evaluated in terms of their effectiveness and
potential to create secondary impacts .
This scope of work assumes that the various County staff
departments and Public Affairs Management' s staff will serve as
the independent reviewers of technical studies submitted for the
project . If the County determines that additional independent
review is needed at a later time, this work can be provide on a
time and materials basis .
The following documents and analyses are currently available :
o Contra Costa County, "General Plan, " January, 1991
o Contra Costa County, "Final EIR on the General Plan, "
December, 1989
o Measure C, 1990 (65/35 Contra Costa Land Preservation Plan)
o Measure C, 1988 (Traffic Standards)
o Contra Costa County, "Bethel Island Area Specific Plan, "
July 10, 1989 and as amended April 16, 1991
o Contra Costa County, "Bethel Island Area Specific Plan,
Draft and Final EIR, October, 1989 and January, 1990,
respectively
o Chartered Land & Cattle Company, "Special-Status Species
Survey", prepared by Huffman & Associates, Inc . , 1991
7
i t�
' . ., r.
��i'•,
e .., �. ...,.
�l: .l:
ii
� Mf
. .�'.�a.. —.. ....
.. 1_ S.
.r j. ._
�.J� \.
1.�
o Chartered Land & Cattle Company, Wetlands "Delineation
Report, " July 10, 1989 and as Amended April 16, 1991
o Chartered Land & Cattle Company, "Geotechnical Investigation
Report, December 22, 1988, prepared by Kleinfelder, Inc .
o Contra Costa County, Initial Study for ,the Cypress Lakes and
County Club project, February 6, 1992
o Brentwood Hills Country Club Draft EIR
o Blackhawk/Nunn Draft EIR
o Hancock Project Specific Plan and Draft EIR
o South Brentwood Village Draft EIR
o Brookside Community Project Draft and Final EIRs
The following documents are expected to be available t•o Public:
Affairs Management prior to completion of the Administrative
Draft EIR for use in preparing the ADEIR.
o Measure C Compliance Statement
o Water Supply Statement to be Provided by Applicant or
Applicable Consultant (residential, landscaping)
0 overview of Maintenance Responsibilities of Homeowrie]--:s
Association to be Provided by Applicant
o Complete List of BIASP Mitigation Measures that are
Specifically Included in the Project Description to be
Provided by Applicant
o Aerial Photographs of Site and Vicinity, 11 x 17 format,
black and white
o Architectural Elevations of Prototypical Houses, Design
Details and Proposed Design Guidelines
o Initial Site Assessment for the Project Site (hazardous
materials) , prepared by Kaldevers & Associates
o Levee, lakes and water quality study to be preparE-d by
Kleinfelder, Inc.
o Jobs/Housing Balance Statement
o Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
Cumulative impacts will be summarized in a separate section. of
the EIR. Where appropriate, the mitigation measures incorporated
into the project by the applicant will be identified and their
effectiveness in minimizing impacts will be evaluated.
Mitigation measures for cumulative impacts will be less specific
than those defined for project specific impacts .
Mitigation measures will be identified fo.r significant effects
and will clearly state implementation responsibilities . A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan as required by Assembly
Bill 3180 will be prepared and included in the Administrati1.,e
Draft EIR and Draft EIR. Revisions to the Plan will be Preserited
in the Administrative Final EIR and Final EIR, as necessary .
The following discussions elaborate on the scope of work for -rhe
technical sections of the EIR.
8
Land Use, Planning and Public Policy
Public Affairs Management will prepare the land use, planning and
public policy section of the EIR. The EIR will describe the
existing land use policies and development guidelines which
pertain to the project site including those of the Contra Costa
County General Plan and Bethel Island Area Specific Plan.
The land use setting of the East County area will be described in
terms of existing conditions and planned growth. Existing
population and housing characteristics of the project site and
vicinity will also be described.
Analysis of the project' s potential impacts will be conducted.
The analysis will focus on the following topics : consistency with
existing land use and zoning designations; compatibility with
adjacent land uses; loss of agricultural land and related
impacts; consistency with the goals, policies and development
guidelines of the Contra Costa County General Plan (1991)
including: conformance with the 65/35 Land Preservation Plan,
Growth Management Ordinance, Safety Element, Public Services
Element, park land dedication requirements and planned trails;
and, consistency with the goals, policies and development
guidelines of the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan including
requirements of the "Off-Island Bonus Area. "
The review of the proposed project in terms of the Off-Island
Bonus Area will include an analysis of project consistency with
the overall Density Cap-iof not more than 2, 909 dwelling units .
This analysis will address total number of units proposed as a
part of the project and those proposed by other pending
proposals .
Potential impacts associated with the provision of "Drilling
Easements" will also be discussed. In addition, the impacts
discussion will evaluate the project' s affect on local population
including: population densities and distributions; growth
patterns and rates; and, the jobs/housing balance (population
information will be used in other sections of the EIR to
determine impacts on public services, utilities, transportation
systems, etc. ) .
Appropriate mitigation measures will be specified to reduce or
avoid potential adverse impacts .
9
Transportation/Circulation
Abrams Associates will prepare the transportation/circulation
section of the EIR. The analysis will include a detailed
analysis of project-specific traffic impacts . This analysis will
include: project related traffic volume increases along area
roadways; impacts on intersection level of service at key
intersections (AM and PM peak hours) ; potential parking impacts
associated with existing and proposed commercial and recreational
facilities, impacts on existing transit services and site access .
The site plan will be reviewed for compliance with County, and
generally accepted traffic engineering standards . Special
attention will be given to emergency access, safety in foggy
conditions and evacuation procedures .
Abrams Associates will also address potential impacts to marine
traffic in a qualitative manner through consultations with
appropriate local agencies and maritime officials .
The EIR will describe the circulation system in the project area
and vicinity. The analysis will verify existing traffic volumes
and intersection levels of service along Bethel Island and
Cypress Roads presented in the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan
EIR. Relevant transportation policies from the Contra Costa
County General Plan and planned roadway improvements will also be
discussed. In addition, local marine facilities will be
described based on information in the Bethel Island Area Specific
Plan EIR. The following discussion describes the scope of work
in more detail .
Intersection level of service will be analyzed using the Circular
212 method as modified by the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority. Regional roadway links will be analyzed using the
Highway Capacity Manual (1985) techniques . The contribution of
traffic added by the project to regional roadway links will be
identified.
Abrams Associates will build upon the work they are currently
doing for six housing development projects in Oakley and the
Delta Expressway EIR. This work involves updating the model to
reflect all existing, approved and pending projects in rural
eastern Contra Costa County .
Review of the information provided by the Contra Costa County
Community Development Department indicates that this project is
included in the background growth assumptions for the Oakley
projects . As a result, the model revisions can be provided
efficiently.
10
The transportation analysis will focus on three types of project
impacts :
• Site access and internal circulation
• Local Roadways (Bethel Island/Oakley vicinity)
• Regional Roadways
The last two elements are requirements of the County' s Measure C
1988 growth management program, and CEQA.
The proposed study area includes the following intersections :
• Bethel Island/Oakley Vicinity Intersections :
- Bethel Island Road/Cypress Road*
- Bethel Island Road/Sandmound Road*
- Bethel Island Road/Gateway Road*
- Jersey Island Road/Edens Plains Road/Cypress Road*
- Knightsen Avenue/Cypress Road*
- Sellers Avenue/Cypress Road*
- State Route 4/Cypress Road*
- State Route 4/Oakley Road
- State Route 4/Big Break Road
- State Route 4/Neroly Road/Bridgehead Road
- State Route 4/Laurel Road
- O' Hara Avenue/Laurel Road
- Empire Avenue/Laurel Road
- Rose Avenue/Laurel Road
- Rose Avenue/Cypress Road
- O' Hara Avenue/Cypress Road
- Empire Avenue/Cypress Road
* indicates locations where new turning movement
counts are needed
• Regional Roadways :
- State Route 4 freeway, west of Hillerest Avenue
- State Route 4 freeway, west of Lone Tree Way
- State Route 4 freeway, at Willow Pass Grade
- Vasco Road, south of Camino Diablo
A field review of the study area will be made noting existing
roadway and traffic conditions . Morning and evening peak period
traffic counts will be taken at seven locations, as indicated by
asterisks in the above list . Daily traffic counts on regional
routes will be obtained from existing data .
11
Based on discussions with County staff, the transportation impact
analysis will include the following scenarios :
• Existing conditions .
• Existing plus approved plus pending (without Cypress Lakes) .
This will be done using the Delta Expressway travel model,
as recently modified for analysis of six developments in
Oakley. Information on status of projects has already been
obtained from County Community Development Department and no
changes to this database are expected. In Antioch,
Brentwood and other jurisdictions, land use estimates will
be based on a year 2010 ABAG forecast . This analysis has
also already been done, and approved by County Community
Development Department staff. No further adjustments to
this data are anticipated.
Approved transportation improvement projects will also be
included in the analysis, reflecting funded transportation
projects . These assumptions have been approved by County
Community Development Department staff, and no further
adjustments are anticipated.
Since the Cypress Lakes project is already included in the
assumptions for the Oakley study, Abrams Associates will
simply remove the Cypress Lakes project and rerun the model .
• Existing plus approved plus pending plus project .
This will be a re-run of the "project" scenario for the
Oakley study. We will extract relevant information for use
in this study.
• Cumulative, without the project .
For the cumulative analysis, general plan amendment projects
will be added to the database. The amount of traffic
generated by the project at locations requiring mitigation
will be identified. For Antioch, Brentwood, and other
areas, another five years of growth (consistent with ABAG
Projections 190) will be added to the year 2010 analysis .
Cumulative, including the project .
The cumulative traffic analysis will begin with an evaluation of
the cumulative traffic analyses contained in the Contra Costa
County General Plan and Bethel Island Area Specific Plan EIR.
All assumptions will be confirmed with County staff prior to
analysis .
12
Results of the traffic analysis will be coordinated with Don
Ballanti and Charles M. Salter Associates, who will be preparing
the air quality and noise analyses, respectively. Relevant data
from the traffic analysis for air and noise studies include:
o Intersection turning movements at key study area
intersections during peak hour;
o Estimated signal cycle times at key study area
intersections;
o Estimated peak hour speeds on key links, based on model
volumes and engineering judgement;
o Existing truck counts;
o Trip generation for the project; and,
o Estimated vehicle miles travelled, from the model, with
and without the project .
Project-specific mitigation measures will be determined.
Air Quality
Don Ballanti will prepare the Air Quality section of the EIR.
The setting section of the EIR will contain the following:
• Brief review of local and regional climate, meteorology, and
topography as they affect the accumulation or dispersal of
project-generated air pollutants;
• Identification of federal, state, and local regulatory
agencies responsible for air quality management;
• Brief summary of federal, state, and local air quality
policies, regulations, and standards as they pertain to the
proposed project;
• Summary of current air quality conditions and recent trends
(past five years) based on the annual air quality monitoring
data summaries published by the Air Resources Board;
• Identification of existing major sources of air pollution in
the vicinity of the project;
• Identify, on the basis of an inspection of the site and its
environs, the latest BAAQMD emissions inventory, and other
available sources of information;
13
• Discussion of the BAAQMD projections of future air quality
trends over the life of the project, as presented in the
BAAQMD 1991 Clean Air Plan, and the assumptions upon which
the projections are based;
• Policies or goals embodied in the Plan, or in forthcoming
guidance by the U. S . Environmental Protection Agency
implementing the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments, that
would apply to the project will be described along with
BAAQMD' s air quality impact thresholds for new developments
and their tests for measures of significant impacts; and,
• Identification of any air pollution-sensitive land uses or
activities in the vicinity of the project, or along roads
and intersections substantially affected by the project .
The impacts section will discuss, at an appropriate level of
detail, the following:
• The potential for short-term emissions of criteria air
pollutants (for which the U. S . EPA has established ambient
air quality standards) generated by project construction to
contribute to violations of state or federal air quality
standards . This discussion will include the estimation of
the rate of emission of fugitive dust from basic grading of
the site and construction of the levee system, and
combustion emissions of heavy construction equipment that
would be used for these activities . Estimates will be based
on the proposed construction activities and scheduling
provided by the project sponsor . The level of detail of the
discussion and the estimates of emissions will be
appropriate to that of the information provided.
Note: Emissions factors cited in this analysis will be those
in EPA' s AP-42 Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, BAAQMD guidelines, or other published emission
factors .
• Description of the types of air pollutants likely to be
emitted by various elements of the project (commercial,
residential, retail, vehicle traffic) and an annual
inventory of criteria air pollutant emissions for the
project and project-related vehicle travel . The inventory
will be based on the results of the traffic study, and the
latest California Air Resources Board (ARB) EMFAC7EP
emissions factors for mobile sources . Criteria pollutant
emissions will be compared to thresholds of significance
defined by the BAAQMD, and requirements of the BAAQMD 1991
Clean Air Plan. Based on project population, the discussion
will also estimate the number of off-road vehicles,
including boats, that would result from the project, and
their annual emissions .
14
• Microscale air pollutant dispersion modeling will be
conducted using the CALINE4 computer model to calculate
worst-case existing and future (with and without the
project) ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide at
roadside receptor locations . The modeling will be performed
for the most heavily impacted intersection (s) and along
regional or local road segments that would be affected by
project-related motor vehicle traffic . On the basis of this
analysis, the section will describe whether the project
would contribute to future violations of the one-hour or
eight-hour state and federal carbon monoxide standards .
• Discuss the potential for air pollutant emissions from the
project or related activities to adversely affect sensitive
land uses or activities, or to impede attainment of air
quality goals will be discussed along with the project' s
conformance with the BAAQMD' s 1991 Clean Air Plan and the
forthcoming EPA guidance on implementation of the 1990
federal Clean Air act .
• Determine whether project impacts would meet any of the
BAAQMD' s significance tests .
The cumulative impacts will be discussed qualitatively based on
the traffic projections, the results of the air quality analyses
prepared for the County General Plan and the Bethel Island Area
Specific Plan. The potential for combined emissions from the
project and cumulative development to adversely affect air
quality or impede attainment of air quality goals will also be
addressed.
The mitigation discussion will identify practical, feasible
measures to mitigate the adverse impacts of the project on air
quality that are identified in the impact section, and the
entities that would be responsible for imposing and carrying out
the mitigation measure . For each measure, the discussion will
define generally whether the mitigation measure would, by itself
or in concert with other proposed measures, fully or partially
mitigate the impact it addresses . Mitigation measures would be
developed in consultation with the lead agency, responsible
agencies as appropriate, and the project sponsor.
15
Noise
Charles M. Salter Associates will prepare the noise section of
the EIR. The EIR will describe the existing noise environment of
the project site and vicinity and all relevant acoustical
standards such as those contained in the Contra Costa County
General Plan and Bethel Island Area Specific Plan EIR. The
analysis will verify existing noise levels along Bethel Island
and Cypress Roads through one continuous 24 hour measurement and
several short-term noise measurements . The location of noise-
sensitive land uses in the project vicinity will be identified.
The impact analysis will cover construction period noise and
traffic noise after construction. The post-construction noise
analysis will be based on the traffic forecasts prepared by DKS
and will address project related noise increases on adjacent land
uses and compatibility of the project with the existing and
future noise environment . The focus of the analysis will be on
Cypress Road and other roadways in the project vicinity that
would be subject to substantial increases in traffic volumes .
Four future scenarios will be evaluated:
1 . Existing plus approved and pending projects (without
project)
2 . Existing plus approved and pending projects (with project)
3 . Cumulative with project
4 . Cumulative without project
The analysis will compare the results of the cumulative scenario
with the analysis prepared in conjunction with the Contra Costa
County General Plan and Bethel Island Area Specific Plan.
The analysis will specify appropriate mitigation measures to
reduce or avoid project-specific noise impacts both on-site as
well as off-site. In addition, appropriate mitigation measures
for cumulative noise impacts will be identified and the project' s
fair-share of these mitigation measures will be determined.
Visual Quality
Public Affairs Management will prepare the visual quality section
of the EIR. The existing visual character of the site will be
described and key views and vantage points identified. .
Photographs of the project site and key views will also be
presented.
The visual impact analysis will address the following issues :
light and glare from automobiles and street lighting, visual
compatibility with surrounding land uses; impact to the aesthetic
character of the Bethel Island/Hotchkiss Tract community; and,
impacts on local and distant views .
16
The visual quality section will also discuss the project' s
conformance with the development guidelines of the County General
Plan and Bethel Island Area Specific Plan will be evaluated.
If necessary, appropriate mitigation measures will be specified
to reduce or avoid any potential adverse visual impacts .
Soils and Geology
Public Affairs Management will prepare the soils and geologic
section of the EIR based on soils and geology information
contained in the Contra Costa County General Plan, the Bethel
Island Area Specific Plan EIR, and the Geotechnical Investigation
Report prepared for the site by Kleinfelder, Inc . No additional
geotechnical work is proposed.
The EIR will describe the existing soil and geologic conditions
including: the existing geology of the site and vicinity; the
existing soils present on the site; the structural composition of
existing levees and local and regional seismicity. The soils
discussion will determine whether the site has peat soils or
other soils characteristics that present potential impacts on
site development .
Based on existing available information, the EIR will contain a
review of the potential soil and geologic impacts of the project .
Topics to be addressed include: the potential for seismically
induced geologic hazards (liquefaction, subsidence levee
disruption and soil settlement) ; and potential soil erosion
impacts . The EIR will evaluate the effectiveness of the
applicant' s proposed Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan . In
addition, the potential soil and geologic impacts associated with
excavation for the proposed lakes will be addressed. Review of
the applicant' s Geotechnical Investigation Report by the County
Geologist or the County' s consulting geologist is recommended.
If necessary, appropriate mitigation measures will be specified
to reduce or avoid potential soil and geologic impacts .
Hydrology and Drainage
Public Affairs Management will prepare the hydrology and drainage
section of the EIR based on the results of the technical study
prepared by Kleinfelder, Inc . and consultation with key agencies
such as the Reclamation District . The EIR will describe the
existing hydrologic and drainage conditions present on the
project site and vicinity based on information contained in the
Contra Costa County General Plan and EIR and the Bethel Island
Area Specific Plan and EIR.
17
The analysis will address the project' s potential impacts on
local drainage and flooding based on information contained in the
Bethel Island Area Specific Plan and EIR. Topics to be addressed
include: susceptibility to major flooding if overtopping or
rupture of the local levee system occurs; potential increases in
runoff due to covering over a significant amount of soil with
urban uses; potential degradation of runoff water quality;
impacts to the adjacent levee system; and, impacts to Delta water
quality.
The analysis will also include analysis of the potential
hydrologic and drainage impacts associate with the proposed
lakes. This analysis will focus on potential impacts to
groundwater resources during excavation, filling and long term
use of the lakes including impacts to groundwater quality and
quantity. In addition, this analysis will address potential
impacts associated with use of the lakes as stormwater detention
facilities and possible maintenance and management concerns .
If necessary, appropriate mitigation measures to reduce or avoid
potential hydrological and drainage impacts will be identified.
Plant and Animal Life
Public Affairs Management will prepare the plant and animal life
section of the EIR based on information contained in the Contra
Costa County General Plan and EIR, the Bethel Island Area
Specific Plan and EIR, the Special-Status Species Survey and
wetlands Delineation Report prepared by Huffman & Associates .
The EIR will describe the existing vegetative communities present
on the project site including wetlands and associated wildlife
species . Lists of threatened, rare or endangered plant and
animal species known, or thought to exist near the project site
will also be presented.
The EIR will provide a review of the project' s potential impacts
on plant and animal life . The impact section will summarize the
findings of the Special-Status Species Survey and Wetlands
Delineation Report prepared by Huffman & Associates . Topics to
be discussed include: direct and indirect impacts on plant and
animal life; impacts on rare, threatened or endangered plant and
animal species; and impacts to wetlands .
Mitigation measures proposed by the project applicant for the
replacement of affected wetlands will be discussed and will be
evaluated in terms of effectiveness . In addition, requirements
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act will . be discussed as they
apply to the project . If necessary, appropriate mitigation
measures to reduce or avoid impacts to wetlands and special-
status plant and animal species will be discussed.
18
Preparation of applications for the Section 404 Permit and Fish
and Game Stream Alternation Agreement are the responsibility of
the applicant .
Public Services
Public Affairs management will prepare the Public Services
section of the EIR. The EIR will describe the existing public
services and facilities which serve the project site and vicinity
and any necessary LAFCO actions and policy related to the
project . Public services which will be described include: fire,
police, ambulance, hospitals, schools, parks, and public facility
maintenance services .
The EIR will contain an analysis of the project' s impact on
various public services . The evaluation will focus on the
project' s specific impact on: the Contra Costa County Sheriff' s
Department; The Bethel Island and Oakley Fire Protection
Districts; the Oakley and Liberty Union High School Districts;
and, the Contra Costa County Public Works Department . The
analysis will summarize information contained in the "Bethel
Island Area Specific Plan EIR" supplemented by consultations with
the affected agencies .
If necessary, appropriate mitigation measures to reduce or avoid
potential impacts will be discussed.
Utilities
Public Affairs Management will prepare the utilities section of
the EIR. The EIR will describe the existing utilities which
serve the project site and vicinity such as the Western Area
Power Association (WAPA) transmission lines and utilities which
may be needed to serve the project . Potential LAFCO actions and
policy related to the project will be discussed briefly in the
section. Potential annexation issues will be discussed in the
Land Use, Planning and Public Policy section of the EIR.
The EIR will contain an analysis of the project' s potential
impacts on local utilities including: domestic water supplies;
wastewater treatment capacity; capacity of storm drainage
systems; and, electrical utilities . The analysis will include:
review of the project' s proposed utility plans and utility
requirements; review of information contained in the "Bethel
Island Area Specific Plan EIR" regarding utility impacts; and,
consultations with local utility providers to determine specific
impacts . j
If necessary, appropriate mitigation measures will be discussed
to reduce or avoid potential impacts .
19
Human Health
Public Affairs Management will prepare the human health section
of the EIR. This section of the EIR will address potential
hazardous materials impacts, mosquito abatement issues and
potential health risks associated with high voltage power lines .
The hazardous materials discussion will be based on an
independent review of the Initial Site Assessment (ISA) submitted
by Kaldevers & Associates . The Human Health section of the EIR
will summarize the ISA and subsequent consultations with the
applicant' s consultants and applicable public agencies .
The discussions of mosquito abatement issues and health risks
associated with power lines will briefly summarize potential
risks based on existing available research. Where appropriate,
mitigation measures will be specified.
Cultural Resources
William Self Associates will prepare the cultural resource
section of the EIR. At this time, the scope of work for this
section of the EIR only includes Phase I of the required work.
The Phase I Scope of Work will include the following:
• Record Search including contacting the California
Archeological Inventory, Northwest Information Center at
Sonoma State University to conduct a thorough record search
for the project area and. immediate vicinity. All previous
cultural resource surveys, known historic or prehistoric
sites, and listed or eligible National Register of Historic
Places properties within a one mile radius of the project
area will be identified on USGS topographic quads of the
area. Copies of applicable site records and survey reports
will also be made. State and local historic site
inventories will be reviewed to identify the presence of any
"listed" sites in the project vicinity. Literature on the
history, prehistory and ethnography of the area will also be
consulted, as needed.
• Data Review of existing information relating to any previous
cultural resource surveys on the project parcel and in the
immediate area will be reviewed relative to results of such
surveys and subsequent recommendations . Any additional
information pertinent to a field assessment will be added to
the USGS quad of the project parcel .
• Field Reconnaissance of the + 680 acre project area will be
conducted to evaluate surface components visible at any
previously recorded archeological sites in the project area,
and to view the current condition of such sites . (Note : an
20
intensive survey of the entire parcel to fulfill CEQA
Appendix K (or federal) requirements is not proposed at this
stage) .
• Cultural Resource Assessment Report will be prepared and
will include a brief description of the project and its
location, a discussion of the results of the record search,
a brief explanation of reconnaissance methodology, and the
results of the area and site evaluation. Recommendations
for additional field survey, archeological site record
updates, and subsurface testing will be presented based upon
the results of the record search and the current condition
of any sites or features that exist on the parcel .
If no resources are found, the EIR section will be based on the
Phase I work.
In the event that the Phase I work concludes that significant
cultural resources would be impacted by the project, a second
phase of work (Phase II) would be conducted. The Phase II work
could include :
• Project Area Survey of the entire Area of Potential . Effect
(the project area and any additional area likely to be
subjected to direct or indirect impacts) would be conducted
at a level of intensity satisfactory to identify historic
properties (including both historic and prehistoric sites)
that might be affected. All known, previously recorded
archeological sites identified in Phase I will be revisited
and new (updated) Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR)
site records prepared on sites for which the latest site
records is older than 10 years . Any new sites discovered
during the survey will be recorded on appropriate DPR site
forms as well . Limited subsurface testing (augering or
shovel excavations) may be conducted on portions of those
sites where such information will aid in determining site
integrity, extent, or significance . Limited mechanical
testing (e.g. backhoe trenching) may be warranted should
there be evidence that subsurface deposits extend beyond 75
cm. (30 inches) in depth. Implementation of the California
Archeological Resource Identification and Data Acquisition
Program for Sparse Lithic Scatters would be on an as-needed
basis as determined in consultation with the State Historic
Preservation Office.
Specific details and costs associated with development of
the above described survey and testing program would be
prepared following the Phase I data gathering aspects of the
project . This scope and budget do not include any costs
associated with the Phase II archeological work.
21
• Cultural Resource Survey Report would be prepared to meet
the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior' s
Standards and Guidelines for Archeological .Documentation (48
FR 44734) . The report would discuss the following: the
project, its locations and any proposed alternatives;
environmental setting (natural and cultural environment) ;
results of the record search; survey methodology and
results, including a description of historic properties
discovered, if any; application of the criteria for
eligibility to the National Register; an assessment of the
potential effect of the undertaking on any properties
recommended as eligible for the National Register, and
possible measures to mitigate such effects; and references .
• NHPA Section 106 Consultation (assuming USACE involvement :
Wetlands Permit . As required by regulation under Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) ,
projects which include Federal involvement (wetlands
permit) , are required to consult with the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) . A correspondence to the SHPO
would be prepared describing the proposed Federal
undertaking and its location, and other pertinent project
information, and a request for information relative to
potential impacts to historic properties listed on or
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places . The letter would be prepared for signature on
appropriate Federal Lead Agency (in this case the U. S . Army
Corps of Engineers. [USACE] ) letterhead and submitted to the
SHPO for comment . This action would initiate the required
Section 106 consultation process .
In addition, as required by 36 CFR 800, appropriate Native
American representatives, including the Native American
Heritage Commission and local tribal or Rancheria leaders,
and interested local groups would be provided with similar
information related to the proposed undertaking and its
location. Information pertaining to areas of religious
significance or traditional cultural value in the project
region would be sought from Native American groups .
In order for USACE to fully comply with the requirements of
the National Historic Preservation Act, the following
additional steps would be conducted upon completion of the
Historic Properties Identification phase (Phase I) :
• Should no historic properties be discovered during the
survey, appropriate documentation should be prepared
for USACE submittal to the SHPO in justification
thereof.
• Should historic properties be discovered during the
survey, the criteria for eligibility to the National
22
Register of Historic Places (36 CFR 60 . 4) would be
applied to determine eligibility. Should the
properties not meet the criteria for eligibility,
appropriate substantiating documentation should be
prepared for USACE submittal to the SHPO for
concurrence. Given SHPO concurrence, no additional
investigation would be required.
• Should historic properties be found which are
recommended as eligible for listing on the National
Register based on their meeting one or more eligibility
criteria, and the SHPO agrees with the recommendation,
they would be treated as eligible for purposes of the
undertaking. The USACE, in consultation with SHPO,
then assesses the potential effect of the undertaking
as required in 36 CFR 800 . 5 . Additional SHPO
consultation, as well as Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) consultation then occurs, with
supporting documentation as follows : Should the
project be found to have No Effect or No Adverse Effect
on historic properties, it proceeds (following
appropriate documentation and concurrence) . Should the
project be found to have an Adverse Effect on historic
properties, an additional level of consultation between
the SHPO, ACHP, and the USACE then ensues, culminating
in an Agreement Document as to how to best mitigate the
adverse effect .
Energy
Public Affairs Management will prepare the energy section of the
EIR. The energy section will focus on the issues raised in
Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines . The emphasis of the
discussion will be on measures to avoid or reduce inefficient,
wasteful and unnecessary consumption of energy . An overview
discussion will be provided that addresses transportation energy
consumption and residential/recreational uses of energy .
Other Required Technical Analyses
The EIR will provide separate summary discussions of the
unavoidable impacts of the project, cumulative impacts,
significant irreversible changes, growth inducing impacts and
short term/long term impacts .
The cumulative impacts analysis of the EIR will summarize the
cumulative impacts discussions in the EIR and will assess the
cumulative impacts identified in the Contra Costa County General
Plan EIR and the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan EIR.
23
Alternatives
The EIR will examine a reasonable range of alternatives to the
proposed project as required by Section 15126 (d) of the CEQA
Guidelines and as defined by Contra Costa County. Prior to
conducting the alternatives analysis, Public Affairs Management
will meet with the County and applicant to determine the final
set of alternatives to be evaluated and the key assumptions . At
this time, the alternatives to be discussed include :
1 . The No Project Alternative (as required by CEQA) ;
2 . The Proposed Project with a Commercial Component;
3 . Ranchette Alternative: 1 dwelling unit/five acres
(approximately 136 units) . This alternative illustrates
development under the BIASP without the bonus density;
4 . Low End of Bonus Density Range Alternative : 512 Units;
5 . High End of Bonus Density Range Alternative : 1500 Units;
and,
6 . One Off-Site Alternative : Site and Assumptions to be
Defined.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to comply with the
intent of the CEQA Guidelines and Assembly Bill 3180 will be
prepared as a separate document . The Monitoring and Reporting
Program will : follow locally adopted procedures; clarify
responsibilities for each mitigation measure and related
monitoring tasks; provide a sample mitigation compliance report;
contain a master mitigation compliance checklist; and, provide a
timeline for implementation of the measures . The Draft Program
will be submitted with the Administrative Final EIR. Revisions
to the Plan will be presented in the Administrative Final EIR and
Final EIR, as necessary.
Other EIR Sections
A list of references used to prepare the report and a list of the
authors of the EIR will be included. The Initial Study, letters
received in response to the Notice of Preparation and other
pertinent documents will be presented in the appendices of the
EIR.
Delivery of the Administrative Draft EIR
A total of 5 copies of the Administrative Draft EIR will be
prepared and submitted to County Staff for review and comment .
24
PHASE II : PREPARATION OF THE DRAFT EIR
Upon conclusion of the review of the Administrative Draft EIR,
one revision of the EIR will be completed. Additional revisions
of the EIR are not included in the Scope of Work. Upon
completion of the revision, and with staff approval, 50 copies of
the Draft EIR will be printed and delivered to the County for
distribution and public review.
Phase II also includes attendance at two public meetings to
present the Draft EIR before the County Planning Commission and
respond to comments .
PHASE III: PREPARATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE FINAL AND FINAL EIR
Upon conclusion of the Draft EIR circulation period, the
consultant will prepare an Administrative Final EIR then a Final
EIR that will contain the following:
1 . Copies of comment letters on the Draft EIR and related
transcripts from public meetings (transcripts prepared by
the County)
2 . Summary list of comment letters on the Draft EIR.
3 . Responses to comments on the Draft EIR
4 . Revised summary findings
5. Revised mitigation monitoring and reporting plan, if
required
All responses to comments will be prepare in accordance with the
requirements of the CEQA Guidelines .
An administrative version of the Final EIR will be submitted to
County Staff and the Applicant' s legal counsel for review and
comments . One revision of the Administrative Final EIR is
included in Phase III work based upon staff comments .
Upon authorization of the Staff, 5 Copies of the Administrative
Final EIR and 50 copies of the Final EIR will be reproduced and
transmitted to County Staff.
Phase III includes attendance at two Planning Commission meetings
and two Board of Supervisors meetings to present the Final EIR
and to respond to comments .
PUBLIC MEETINGS
Public Affairs Management will attend a total of six (6) public
meetings/hearings with either the Planning Commission or Board of
Supervisors as a part of the EIR review. Attendance at
additional hearings will be provided on a time and materials
basis .
25
H. SCHEDULE AND LIST OF PRODUCTS
The following schedule identifies the estimated dates for the key
milestones related to the EIR process and provides a summary of
the products that will be prepared as a part of the project . An
ongoing schedule update will be provided at all coordination
meetings . Events which may delay the schedule (including delayed
receipt of requested information) will be identified and promptly
reported to the County. Public Affairs Management will be
responsible for avoiding delays and expediting the schedule.
MILESTONE ESTIMATED DATE
PAM Authorized to Start Work on EIR Process March, 1992
(verbal authorization from County)
Receipt of all Letters in Response to the 4/3/92
Notice of Preparation
Subs Authorized to Start Work 4/10/92
Contract Approved by County Board of Supervisors 4/22/92
Receipt of all Technical Studies from 4/24/92
Applicant
Traffic Volumes, Speeds & LOS Calculations 5/8/92
prepared (4 weeks) , AQ & Noise Calculations
Begin
Traffic, Air Quality & Noise Technical Work 5/22/92
completed and first drafts of EIR tech
sections delivered to PAM (2 weeks following
traffic data)
Delivery of the Administrative Draft 6/1/92
EIR (ADEIR) including Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (5 Copies)
County Staff Comments on ADEIR Obtained by 6/15/92
Public Affairs Management (2 weeks)
Delivery of the Draft EIR and Draft 7/1/92
MMRP (50 Copies)
45 Day Public Review Period 7/1/92 to
8/17/92
Public Hearings (Planning Commission Only) Start in July, Aug
26
MILESTONE ESTIMATED DATE
Public Affairs Management Receives 8/18/92
Complete Set of Comments on the Draft
EIR from County Staff
Delivery of the Administrative Final EIR 8/30/92
the Draft MMRP (5 Copies)
County Staff Comments Obtained by 9/7/92
Public Affairs Management (1 weeks)
Delivery of the Final EIR and the 9/15/92
the Final MMRP (50 Copies)
Public Hearings (Planning Commission) Late Sept 92
Public Hearings (Board of Supervisors) Oct 92
Action on the Project
* All dates subject to change depending on County review
requirements
27
I. COST PROPOSAL
The total cost for all phases of the environmental work, as defined
herein, is $101, 650 . All work will be done on a time and materials
basis and will be billed monthly. Billing Rates for Public Affairs
Management are contained in Exhibit A.
The cost breakdown by major tasks is summarized as follows:
o Public Affairs Management S 70, 000
(Technical Sections described
herein, EIR Overall Preparation,
Agency Coordination)
o Abrams Associates IS 12, 000
(Traffic Study)
o Don Ballanti 0, 150
(Air Quality Study)
o Charles M. Salter Associates $ 6, 500
(Noise Study)
o William Self Associates S 4, 000
(Phase I - Cultural Resources Study)
o Estimated Printing Costs $ 3, 000
TOTAL BUDGET $101, 60
This cost assumes that the basic descriptions Of the proposed project
and the alternatives remain unchanged during the course ^If the
analysis . Substantial revisions to the schedule or definition of the
proposed projector alternatives during the course of the analysis may
result in addition analyses and costs not covered by t: is proposal.
Substantial modifications to the scope of work required by the County
may also warrant additional budget.
Failure of the County to pay all bills within o0 days of receipt may
result in a Stop Work by Public Affairs Management .
i
28
i
0
J. SUMMARY LIST OF LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION
RESIDENTS
• Shipway, Diane K. , Resident, February 14, 1992
• Butler, Donald W. , Resident, February 18, 1992
• Edwards, Darrell B. , Resident, February 21, 1992
• Gromm, Robert D. , Reclamation District 799, February 25, 1992
• Wong, Dale, Resident, February 26, 1992
• Faria, Stanley E. , Resident, March 1, 1992
• Zimmerman, James C. , Resident, March 1, 1992
• All, Guy and Katie, Residents, March 1, 1992
• Potter, Carroll S. , Resident, March 2, 1992
• Burkholtz, Gust, Resident, March 2, 1992
• O' Keeffe, Audrey & Jack, Residents, March 2, 1992
• Reeves, Mary, Resident, March 2, 1992
• Allen, Paul, Resident, March 3, 1992
• Lee, Terry & Deborah, Residents, March 3, 1992
• Allen, Liza, Resident, March 9, 1992
• Dannelley, C. Elaine, Resident, March 10, 1992
• Darst, Barbara, Resident, March 10, 1992
• Dunn, Mr. & Mrs . John L. , Residents, March 11, 1992
• Frizzell, Mr. & Mrs . Glenn, Residents, March 11, 1992
• Hubbard, Mr. & Mrs . George, Residents, March 11, 1992
PUBLIC AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES
• Avalon, Mitch, Contra Costa County Public Works, March 12, 1992
• Adams, Gary, Caltrans District 4, March 13, 1992
• Alexeeff, Val, Growth Management & Econ . Devel . Agency, April 3,
1992
• Sanders, Dwight, State Lands Commission, March 20, 1992
• Oliva, Stephen E . , Department of Conservation, March 20, 1992
• Jensen, Arthur R. , Contra Costa Water Dist . , March 11, 1992
• Gromm, Robert D. , Reclamation District 799, March 11, 1992
• White, Wayne S . , U. S . Dept . of the Interior, March 10, 1992
• Messersmith, James D. , Dept . of Fish and Game, March 9, 1992
• Waletzko, Ray, Mosquito Abatement Dist . , March 9, 1992
• Sherwood, William M. , Resident, March 9, 1992
• Brumleve, Thomas D. , Contra Costa Resource Conservation Dist . ,
March 2, 1992
• Choi, Sam, Contra Costa County Flood Control Dist . , February 27,
1992
• Cutler, Jim, LAFCO Planning Advisor, February 18, 1992
• Nunenkamp, David, Governor' s Office of Planning, February 20,
1992
• Torlakson, Tom, Contra Costa County Supervisor, February 20, 1992
• Holmes, Howard, Bethel Island Muni Improv. Dist . , March 11, 1992
29
P
OTHER
• Wood, Kimberly, Land Planning Consultants Inc . , February 18, 1992
• Buller, Alexander, Bethel Island Area Assoc. , March 9, 1992
• Dickson, Kathryn Burkett, Dickson & Ross Law, March 9, 1992
• Neudeck, Christopher H. , Kjeldsen-Sinnock & Assoc . , March 11,
1992
• Burns, Barbara, Burns Engineering, March 11, 1992
30
S
EXHIBIT A
PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGEMENT
FEE SCHEDULE
A. Professional services will be rendered based on the
following hourly rates :
President/Principal : $115 . 00
Senior Program Manager: 95 . 00
Division Manager: 85 . 00
Project Manager: 65 . 00
Public Affairs Planning Associate : 50 . 00
Public Affairs Assistant : 40 . 00
Clerical/Support Staff : 35 . 00
B. Provision of related services and reimbursable exiDenses will
be charged to the client as follows :
Subcontractor Services : At cost, plus
15 admin. fee
Printing/Copying: At cost
Shipping/Messenger Services : At cost
Travel and Mileage : At cost
Postage: At cost
FAX Services/Conference Calls : At cost
Project Related Supplies : At cost
Graphics At cost
C. Expert witness services shall be provided at the rate of
$200 . 00 per hour of witness and preparation time.
** Rates effective through December, 1992 and are subject to
change after that period.
EXHIBIT B
---T .._ r-.:
�I. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN —FINAL DEVELOPMENT PL
FOR ALL NON-RESIDENTIAL USES FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS „E
r: VESTING TENTATIVE M .
L` SUBDIVISION 756
CYPRESS,-��-
k
SCALE:V-200' LAKES COUNTRY
-�-CLUB
i...cE.'�,O'NOOryO BETHEL ISLAND AREA. CONTRA COSTA S'ROUNTY
4 L '
RDAO CHARTERED—
.. LAND&CATTLE
2.
F �.1 r�. iors•se;;tae
:. {AAAA • --1 I: n.Il•LF.Ee�
-..','•- ;�.` SHEET INDEX NOTES
OWN-
.f/iya� .��:`:l,.''A;-I':crrRessc'y 0.r?`..•, :,� CONTENTS S.-I
. I 0 SCALE SASEMAP
}:: 1 N-5 ELOPER:
.��
.I�IEt.(>• .N`I, \�.:. :','�..�._._Vi,f. , ENGINEER:
{ L"
, ';T` ... `;��; \� •�� .,,�:� i - EI�N
EER: I
EAsfxENTlAID t! n[.a..I...C.»»,
- PiHEaSON'S - t.
f� 1
`~ 1+`�''•`- CEL NOS: •»-»a-.:t[»-»a-».
C' •.-: mgvING;ANOE `` ' c,.. '
U. I
I I .. AREA: AAAA
LEVEE
a.. -.y` zoNINO .-.
PROPOSED ZONING:
I! :y'Y�'." tota7eT4•.a..: l ^� CLUBHOUSE.
%i '`_�• .SII ",' _ -"tW GENERAL PLAN: A.ucuLrv.0 AaHea.r:AL
/.,)� �... , UTILITIES: el..
\,:\..,' ''; I i-i I`,I ...L'•r - �-,^ ._LEVEE
CONTOUR INTERVAL: . :
�i -I\ .�iro..,•Y I ._��.r I7� ::N,.... `a ..I EXISTING USE:• .I
i.O,e
1• ,; ,r...-.,: !-j'y;': _ :'-�_ ..{L;,;••'•\,' 7.-,a
P.orosfD usE..[.L..o vt[.v,..G..a...
' I �J ! - USE SU
-sNc'1h
INV: ':;�) f\� 'i.' - / [•tif.; �{ ,: �,� LAND SUMMARY
•I I LEAGE
s-WT
RES DENtIAL LAID USE per
,..,r, .�y > :�.y _- ,",a�• `� 3.•. �'u�. ,.iti = .AREEL .I
.�' - .. .�,./ a ;aaS»a-ae,j _� � wsCNOOL-orruxl .Ac
�'� \: �I ti' DAYCARE !0.l AC
.:. .. COMMERCIAL 10.0 AC
LF:`•„A II I
`I I. SOMEPS CLUE 3.0 AC
I'•_....�J -J•,' j I L] `k.i ``'1vi, 1 ..- Gi :':i.\ �I- GSWIM AND OLF COURSE HIS CLU. S.a AC \
a lY 77711112 AG
II I. (/ __I. \) PARK AE
tri 1, _)`: �.:'1 • Cis�: LAKES .e AC
I- I N•�" ! Eu={3 i.. ,7 OPEN SPACE 11..AC
,. .. Wit•-.
• J—. L,.,.. ( ,T DRILL S t0 AC
` LEGEND f IS n^:t. •y ./ .�,� !U. i' _
Y �'^'lyf l'2' , DRILL alrfs te.a Ac
.I /i, /: ✓.:,�. I,.J I ,_= ? .,,.,
WETLANDS
sraffrs .o AC
. : N-4 NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATION �r `." ,�`' \ i:' ':''..' 'Vv�_�o::n '` � fir' •�.'/•' WETlAH04 'EAE Ac
•I } /. iTa MrtgATgN
L
tTORY GRAIN tYfTlY [ .% i l� ..Tf•J. '_ •>T•�^.•� /`9 ^ ' T.:✓ watu,1411.(, E eE
{lWfR{YtTEY I I,• �'F ���ry�C[Yy� .._.! '.✓'\C'.l (1'-�-r!c .I _' �11 7�..-I _ AREA LOFTWETl4108 FILLED-LO Cl.a
--- `._i r" •!i! '"I 'r�}�'i'C;�.��, :J a =erg;i.a;' I�..-_ _-_I:
PAD ELEVATION
III /"' ' )' :::�':�•` "" ':a �/ I - _ .........
,e RESIDENTIAL USE SUMMARY
p NEIGNBORN0001 PH ACREAGE DENSITY
.rr,,. 4 �o`., LOTS E
TOP OF PAVEMENT fLEVAT IOM I: •,.�r?' ?`?L`2'/ .,,�; UNITS
.." `>'•AAAA •.�`. `c'I x t 6.000 sr I as a
I J'`I,i/'��J-.SEAL'--:"..T�. ,u
+� tr.eeT GRADE jL. _ _ _ - E M.0
El _.. I -I'•.J.Gars�, ■, `:;•S.s,T'"1-!_'._;_.�- ..l;�lsa ;V-I !`' _..._ x-x x.000 ss
I--�PxAte LINE
'� .StL. `�- ' •I -
WfnAxost..1=1;'l-1'LJ '...3j"a;'%' "�,:s�.. '�.: .-.:� x a t.000 sr aa.L P. a.s
WmAHOf PILLED f iN RAGA. .—MIA-iwi,�OR` `: ^`=.,.-+AAAA',.-`:r:,. \N�;..M !^il PARCEL AA .. H-• f.000 Y . aa. R. A.,
.,.. l
J. 1.._I.I `I ti.l' N-! ...o.EF I .. ...
�� +a±-_�� :�. —._ ._.-____ N• s0 . a.z IAT
t:x•.t 1 - _ __ _ I...
N-t .-0 SO I I... ae s.a
.'� ..\�. ..�..,N. tV Iii '\3•. '<4s ' '` \�/I�'r='_ ^ c.��.a-. I
N- t.000 ss 1 :a.s 11. s.1
M-12 8.000 SF 215 E s.✓,.'r .. \ L'. :' A+ .% 1.` EE
1 e.
• Ga
3.1
IN
SITE !> -
1,.
TOTALS Z-1. Ia.1 S I
s
Nk;
,_ :..._. \......r -.
GTE ..�
rot 9�..•q
LEVEE "Ain
..g,
•a[.[cri.,•-a' >!..'- / .%i'.`�•`;tySL. r.i, •.; ,'I ✓/AAAA !'
AAAA ,. .
„i.,lnvtp�
I �\
P114.4
� Iilms-'iS[A�a',�
L.JG�EI' ti'::-:: ': \,�_ ..I.i �i "' IS I
> Eb
'T. , n,.a -i _ tis
...or y,`..i Irv' .f',.. %.., `vmT«::,:�:;':'-.: d:tL :'+,:• '- E.�I ;fin
:.E:...IO _ .,} �'f`��•�±G-I�'Y']'''�.,. ,
LEVEE SECTION B-B \ ,........:N•B / ..,. .1';':.r'• I
.r� UI -
k'S '.?;• L.tGr4.all,a,FOP'. .4^.-r,�:l' +'`.r :J 7 •,,'i0T5 t�tav-livi..'' •1
: al Y -
' -:.' `o :: �.,y.. ti. _aL)e,m+]�.. w "��� �r � I' ENTWD
e
OPEN SPACFLL ��.i. il lI�. ..\'Ul \^ 1 IIENTWO
FS
1'�J_LL�,• �.''�'L�%/�� e u.
I I. T''�, L /�'. ,allLlr'- VICINITY MAP
r;.\. `teR�i- )__j`y7, 11, T r•,
: II
-L--lo; - _ - -
. 1 I,',`:
,' .- ':. •-;AAAA ,
LAKE EDGE SECTION A-A
...
[[»c E n,a. .. ).
i
1
:fir= �..
—_ �r_.,r•{.� �,1.. —r`i_ `' --- - 'f '! - iii n_.:a: ' YY
►;1�ASSOC/ATES
�,.
-
BETNEL ISLAND ROAD STREET SECTION CYPRESS ROAD STREET SECTION TYPICAL STREET SECTION ••SHEET i OF Ij 8