The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 04152003 - D3 y s" Contra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ••�• ''• ,* FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICPCosta COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR o •� . . _ DATE: APRIL 15, 2003 County SrA'couK'r`t SUBJECT: BAY VIEW DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: 1. OPEN the public hearing and receive testimony on the proposed General Plan Amendment, and CLOSE the public hearing; 2. FIND the Mitigated Negative Declaration is adequate and has been prepared consistent with State and County CEQA guidelines; 3. ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program; 4. CONSIDER The East County Regional County Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment and APPROVE the proposed Amendment to the General Plan changing the land use designation to Multiple-Family Residential — Low density; 5. ADOPT the Resolution with Growth Management Findings as the basis for the Board's action. 6. DIRECT staff to include the Bay View Development General Plan Amendment in the First Consolidated General Plan Amendment for 2003. 7. DIRECT staff to file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT. ® YES SIGNATURE. ❑ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ❑ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITE ❑APPROVE ❑ OTHER _5E SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON April 15, 2003 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED Q OTHER ❑X See attached Addendtim-kfer::Board's action. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF - � UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. � AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED DISTRICT III SEAT VACANT April 15, 2003 Contact: Maureen Toms 335-1250 JOHN SWEETEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cc: Patrick Roche, CDD O'Brien Group Resources for Community Development CAO By: eputy County Counsel TIE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on April 15, 20035 by the following vote: AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA, UIIKEMA, GLOVER and DeSAMMER NOES: NOW ABSENT:NONE AB STAIN: NONE ****DISTRICT III SEAT VAS** Resolution No.: 2003/236 SUBJECT: In the Matter of the Bay View Development General Plan Amendment, county File#GP2002-02 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES that: There is filed with this Board and its Clerk, a copy of Resolution#09-2003 adopted by the East County Regional Planning Commission, which discusses the Bay View Development General Plan Amendment(County File#GP2002-02). On Tuesday, April 15, 2003 the Board held a public hearing on said General Plan Amendment discussed by the East County Regional Planning Commission, Resolution#09- 2003. Notice of said hearing was duly given in the manner required by law. The Board at a hearing, called for testimony of all persons interested in this matter. On Tuesday, April 15, 2003 the Board found that the General Plan Amendment will not cause the General Plan to become internally inconsistent. The General Plan Amendment and the remainder of the General Plan comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the County. The land use authorized by th eGeneral Plan Amendment is compatible with the obj ectives,policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan. On Tuesday, April 15, 2003 the Board found that the General Plan Amendment has been fully evaluated the extent to which it achieves each policy, including those pertaining to compatibility of land uses, compliance with principles of the ULL and Measure C-1990, protection of open space, standards regarding geology, soils and earthquake risks, hazardous materials, flood hazards and drainage, protection of water quality,protection of biological resources, transportation standards and goals, regional and local housing needs,jobs/housing balance, noise, protection of air quality,protection of visual resources, standards for public services and utilities, and protection of archeological and historical resources. The General Plan Amendments compliance with all performance standards in the General Plan, including the Growth Management Element policies and standards for traffic levels of service, and performance standards for public services and facilities have been fully considered. On Tuesday, April 15, 2003 the Board found that the Board of Supervisors made the following findings pursuant to the Contra Costa County General Plan Growth Management: a) Traffic: Traffic impacts have been addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the joint single-family and multiple-family projects. A Measure C traffic study was prepared and the suggested mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. b) Water: The Cal Cities Water Company indicated they have capacity to serve the project. c) Sanitary Sewer: The project is within the boundaries of the Delta Diablo Sanitary District, service is planned for the area. d) Fire Protection: The subject property is within the Contra Costa Fire Protection District Boundaries and the project is required to comply with all of the District's requirements, including the payment of fees. e) Public Protection: Although no comments were received from the Sheriffs Department on the Development Plan, the design incorporates "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design"measures. f) Parks and Recreation: Park dedication fees are required per County Ordinance for residential projects. The fee is used to provide parks/recreational opportunities within the area and would offset any impacts to parks. g) Flood Control and Drainage: The project will be required to meet all collect and convey requirements. On April 15, 2003, the Board APPROVED the General Plan Amendment and directed the Bay View Development General Plan Amendment, and map changes attached, be included in the first consolidated General Plan Amendment for 2003 as allowed by State Planning Law. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.A,,, �_ ATTESTED- Z6) J, 12 JOHN SWEETEN, Clerk of the Board Ina'a rviMzz=Uty r BAY VIEW DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (OWNER) AND THE O'BRIEN GROUP (APPLICANT) COUNTY FILE #GP2002-02 A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COUNY GENERAL PLAN TO SHIFT THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, HIGH DENSITY (SH; 5.0—7.2 UNITS PER NET ACRE) DESIGNATION TO MULTIl'LE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY (ML; 7.3 — 119 UNITS PER NET ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 6.9 ACRES. THE SITE IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 200 FT. NORTH OF WILLOW PASS ROAD, BETWEEN FAIRVIEW AVENUE AND NORTH BELLA MONTE, IN THE NORTH BROADWAY NEIGHBORHOOD OF BAY POINT. (096-020-084 (PARTIAL), -086 (PARTIAL), --081, --0775 --0035 AND —068). Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County April 15, 2003 ADDENDUM TO ITEM D.3 April 15, 2003 The Board of Supervisors considered the recommendation by the East County Regional Planning Commission of the request by the O'Brien Group (Applicant) and the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency(Owner) approval of a General Plan Amendment. Maureen Toms, Community Development Department presented the staff report and recommendations. The chair opened the public hearing and the following persons presented testimony: Debra Mason, Chair,Bay Point Project Area Comm., 36 Sandview Drive, West Pittsburg Eric Keller, The O'Brien Group, 2001 Windward Way, Suite 200, San Mateo The chair closed the public hearing. The Board took the following actions: ❑ CLOSED the Public Hearing; ❑ FOUND the Mitigated Negative Declaration is adequate and has been prepared consistent with State and County CEQA guidelines; ❑ ADOPTED the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigated Monitoring Program; ❑ CONSIDERED the East County Regional County Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment ❑ APPROVED the proposed Amendment to the General Plan changing the land use designation to Multiple-Family Residential- Low density; ❑ ADOPTED Resolution 2003-236 with Growth Management Findings as the basis for the Board's action; ❑ DIRECTED staff to include the Bay View Development General Plan Amendment in the First Consolidated General Plan Amendment for 2003; ❑ DIRECTED staff to file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. Bay View General Plan Amendment April 15,.2003 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT: No General Funds would be used. The cost of the General Plan Amendment has been covered by the Redevelopment Agency. BACKGROUND: A major goal of the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan is to improve and expand the supply of decent and safe affordable housing in the Project Area. The proposed Bay View Housing Project will provide fifty- two (52) affordable multiple-family residential units and sixty-nine (69) single-family residential units. The General Plan Amendment involves the single-family portion of the site, changing the land use designation from Single-Family High-Density to Multiple-Family Low-Density. The Redevelopment Agency purchased the property in 2001 and shortly thereafter initiated a Community Planning process. Using the results of the Community Planning process, the Agency sent out a request for proposals for development of the site. The team of Resources for Community Development and the O'Brien Group were selected. On September 10, 2002, the Board of Supervisors authorized the subject General Plan Amendment study. On March 10, 2003, the East County Regional Planning Commission considered the General Plan Amendment, a 69-lot subdivision, a final development plan for the 69 single-family residences, and a minor subdivision and final development plan for the 52 multiple-family residences. The General Plan Amendment was recommended for approval and the subdivisions and final development plans for both portions of the project were approved. In addition, on March 11, 2003, the Board of Supervisors/Redevelopment Agency Board approved the Disposition, Development, and Loan Agreement between the Agency and the development team. The subject site (the single-family portion) is designated Single-Family (SH) Residential High Density (5.0 — 7.2 units per net acre). The General Plan Amendment under consideration would change the site designation to Multiple-Family Low Density (7.3- 11.9 units per net acre). A base of 49.68 units is allowed on the site under the current General Plan designation. The Density Bonus Ordinance allows 13.5 bonus units to be applied to the development due to the provision of 50 affordable units on the multiple-family portion of the project. Thus, a total of 63 units are allowed under the Single-Family Residential High Density General Plan designation. The applicants and the Redevelopment Agency are requesting a General Plan amendment to increase the number of units to 69, in order for the project to be financial feasible. Although the Multiple-Family Low Density designation allows up to 11.9 units per acre, the proposed project would have a density of 10 units per acre. Staff recommends that the subject site under this General Plan Amendment request be re-designated as follows: Re-designate portions of APN:096-020-084, portions of 096-020-086; 096-020-003, 096-020-077, 096-020-068 and 096-020-081, bounded by Fairview Avenue to the west, the future extension of Pullman Avenue to the north, Bella Monte Avenue and the rear property lines of existing residences along Bella Monte Avenue to the east and Willow Pass Road approximately 200 ft. to the south from Single-Family Residential High Density(SH) to Multiple-Family Residential (ML) on the Land Use Element Map. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: The proposed development would not go forward. Resolution No. 09-2003 RESOLUTION OF THE EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN (#GP2002-02)9 A 69-LOT SUBDIVISION (SD8703), A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 69 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES (DP023067). A MINOR SUBDIVISION TO COMBINE LOTS (MS020021). AND A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 51 MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, IN THE BAY POINT AREA. WHEREAS, in 2001, the Redevelopment Agency purchased an approximately eight-acre remediated site in Bay Point,previously used as a auto junkyard; and WHEREAS, following the purchase of the property, the Agency sponsored a Community Planning Process to define the proposed development; and WHEREAS, a competitive Request for Developer Proposals for the development of the site was used,using the results of the Community Planning Process as the basis for development; and WHEREAS, the team of Resources for Community Development, a nonprofit housing development corporation, and The O'Brien Group, afor-profit housing developer, were selected by the Bay Point PAC for the development of the Agency-owned site; and WHEREAS, the development team submitted development plan and subdivision applications for the development of 69 single-family and 51 multiple-family residences; and the O'Brien Group, the developer of the single-family residential portion of the project, requested an amendment to the General Plan, changing the land use designation from Single-Family Residential, High Density (SH; 5.0 — 7.2 units per net acre) designation to Multiple-Family Residential, Low Density (ML; 7.3 — 11.9 units per net acre) for approximately 6.9 acres; and WHEREAS, The single-family residential portion of the project is proposing to use the 13 density bonus units generated from the multiple-family residential portion of the project; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was issued in February 2003; and WHEREAS, after notice was lawfully given, the project was scheduled for hearing before the East County Regional Planning Commission on Monday, March 10, 2003; at which time an opportunity to provide testimony was given, and after having fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that on March 10, 2003, the East County Regional Planning Commission: 1.) Has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to forwarding a recommendation; 2.) Recommends approval of the Bay View Development General Plan Amendment changing the subject sites land use designation Multiple-Family- Low Density Residential (ML); 3.) Approved the subdivision and Final Development Plan for 69 single-family residences, subject the to modified Conditions of Approval and approval of the General Plan Amendment; 4.) Approved the subdivision and Final Development Plan for 51-multiple-family residential units subj ect to the modified Conditions of Approval; 5.) Recommended the Park Dedication fees generated from the project be designated for improvements to Anuta Park on the south side of Willow Pass Road. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the East County Regional Planning Commission mad the following findings pursuant to the Contra Costa County General Plan Growth Management Findings and the County Code Sections 94-2.806 and 84-66.12406: 1. Growth Management Element Performance Standards Finding's a) Traffic: Traffic impacts have been addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the joint single-family and multiple-family projects. A Measure C traffic study was prepared and the suggested mitigation measures have been incorporated into the conditions of approval. b) Water: The Cal Cities Water Company indicated they have capacity to serve the proj ect. c) Sanitary Sewer: The project is within the boundaries of the Delta Diablo Sanitary District, service is planned for the area. d) Fire Protection: The subj ect property is within the Contra Costa Fire Protection District Boundaries and the project is required to comply with all of the District's requirements, including the payment of fees. e) Public Protection: Although no comments were received from the Sheriffs Department on the Development Plan, the design incorporates "Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design"measures. f) Parks and Recreation: Park dedication fees are required per County Ordinance for residential projects. The fee is used to provide parks/recreational opportunities within the area and would offset any impacts to parks. g) Flood Control and Drainage: The project will be required to meet all collect and convey requirements. 2. Findings For Approval of a Final Development Plan: The proposals are consistent with Section 84-66.1406 of the zoning ordinance which requires the following findings be made prior to granting the final development plan approval: a) The applicants intends to start construction within two and one-half years from the effective date of zoning change and approval. The applicant has expressed their desire to begin construction of the project as soon as possible. In addition, the Disposition, Development and Loan Agreement contains a project schedule describing the construction date. b) The planned-unit development is consistent with the County general plan. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan, the Mixed-Use- Willow Pass Road Corridor General Plan designation and the proposed Multiple-Family residential—Low Densit0. General Plan designation. c) In the case of residential development, it will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community. The proposed development locates single- family residential uses in close proximity to existing single-family residential use and multiple family residential along the Willow Pass Road Corridor. The site plan for the project includes several road connections between the neighborhoods to the west and east. d) The development of a harmonious, integrated plan justifies exceptions from the normal application of this code. The single-family and multiple family portions of the project have been designed together to be harmonious with each other as well as the surrounding neighborhoods. 3. Findings for the Subdivisions The proposals are consistent with Section 94-2.806 of the zoning ordinance which requires the following findings be made prior to granting the approvals for the subdivision approvals: a) The proposed land use and density are consistent with the proposed Contra Costa County General Plan designation of Multiple-Family Residential-low density for the single- family residential project and the Mixed-Use Willow Pass Road designation for the multiple-family residential portion of the project. b) Subdivision Design Standards: The internal road network includes a primary road, connecting the neighborhoods to the west and east of the project site. The overall design is compatible with the existing neighborhood and is in keeping with the outcome of the Community Planning Process conducted for the site. The decision of the East County Regional Planning Commission was given on Monday, March 10, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners—MacVittie, Harper, Williams, Day, Dell NOES: Commissioners—None ABSENT: Commissioners—None ABSTAIN: Commissioners—None I, Dennis Barry, Secretary of the East County Regional Planning Commission, herby certify that the foregoing was duly called and approved on March 10, 2003. ATTEST: Lip Dennis Barry—Secretary of he East County Regional Planning Commission, Contra Costa County, State of California. ff NOR'ba I BROADWAY N P GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS r _n ........... r>- y ^ i 4 , " ,. ._ 'o _. _..,. �.. 1 ..... ..._. .. .. .. _- ^.. .;,. ...... a .. .:.w..'� .. _ �_. __. .�: tea... �^... s.. �. FIB -OWLLO ASS " a Qp x 6 �-_ s2 K _ _ , x D)L,,�- 4 vi 4 r ' 0 45 90 180 270 360 Legend Feet Parcels SH(Single Family Residents-High) This map contains copyrighted information.Reproducing all or any portion of this map is an infringement of copyright law.Users of this A' Map Created on February 27,2003 map agree to read and accept County of Contra Costa disclaimer N Contra Costa County Community Development Study Area ML(Multiple Family Residents-Low) of liability and warranties provided herewith.This map was created 651 Pine Street,4th Floor-N.Wing by the Community Development Department.This map was created Martinez,CA 94553-0095 M-5 Mixed Use PR Parks and Recreation by the Community Development Development Department using 37:59:48.455N 122:06:35.384W ( ( ) base map data from the Public Works Department. Agenda Item#4 Community Development Contra Costa County EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 10, 2003, 7:00 P.M. STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS I. INTRODUCTION Bay View Development General Plan Amendment, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Owner) and THE O'BRIEN GROUP (Applicant), County File#: GP2002-02: This is a request for approval of a General Plan Amendment to shift General Plan land use designation from Single-Family Residential, Density High (SH; 5.0—7.2 units per net acre) designation to Multiple-Family g ty Residential, Low Density(ML; 7.3 — 11.9 units per net acre) for approximately 6.9 acres. The site is located approximately 200 ft. north of Willow Pass Road, between Fairview Avenue and North Bella Monte, in the North Broadway neighborhood of Bay Point. (096-020-084 (partial), -086 (partial), --081, --0775 --003, and—068). The site for the requested plan amendment are shown on Figure 1. II. CEQA AND RELATED ACTIONS Staff has processed a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance on this project and has circulated it to affected individuals and agencies. As of this writing no comments have been received on this document. This staff report deals exclusively with the General Plan Amendment request. III. PROJECT SETTING The approximately 6.9 acre site is vacant and relatively flat. The site is a former automotive junkyard that has undergone remediation. The property divides the North Broadway neighborhood into two sub-neighborhoods — the Solano/Poinsettia area and the Highway Crivello area. Small blocks in a grid pattern characterize the Highway/Crivello area,while the Solano/Poinsettia area is characterized by long linear blocks with little interconnection. The proposal will include connectivity to the two areas. The surrounding area includes both 1 single and multiple housing residences,mobile home parks and vacant properties. The site is bounded on the west by Fairview Avenue, a private gravel road with approximately 10 residences fronting it. To the north of the side is vacant land owned by Union Pacific Railroad, rail spurs and the main rail line further north. To the east of the site are some vacant properties and the rear of single-family residences that front Bella Monte Avenue. To the south of the site is the business that fronts Willow Pass Road on the approximately 2-acre site that is currently under consideration for a multiple-family residential project. The Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency has invested substantial capital into this area. Since 1997, the Redevelopment Agency has been implementing the North Broadway Infrastructure Program that included the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks,storm drain lines,street lights and east-west cross streets. The site is approximately 200 ft north of the Willow Pass Road corridor. Willow Pass Road is the major east-west corridor through Bay Point. The Board of Supervisors authorized a general plan review for the site on September 10, 2002. The authorization for the study was to examine whether neighboring properties should be included in the amendment. The recommendation for a General Plan Amendment includes an additional site not owned by the Agency and not contemplated for development at this time(APN 096-020-081). The site is vacant and is adjacent to the proposed 69-unit proposed project. It is appropriate to include the site in the amendment, due to its vacant condition,proximity to the proposed project and to facilitate its potential incorporation into the new development. IV. THE EXISTING COUNTY GENERAL PLAN The subject site is designated Single-Family(SH)Residential High Density(5.0—7.2 units per net acre). Staff research indicated the SH designation has been in effect since at least 1963 as it is depicted in the Contra Costa County Land Use and Circulation Plan and again in the West Pittsburg Area General Plan adopted in 1982(which was subsequently consolidated into the County General Plan). The site was historically used as a junkyard and ceased that operation in the last decade. The site separates two residential neighborhoods, one to the west and one to the east. The proposed project will link these neighborhoods. The General Plan Amendment under consideration would change the site designation to Multiple-Family Low Density(7.3- 11.9 units per net acre). A base of 49.68 units is allowed on the site under the current General Plan designation. The Density Bonus Ordinance allows 13.5 bonus units to be applied to the development due to the provision of 50 affordable units on the multiple-family portion of the project. Thus, a total of 63 units are allowed under the Single-Family Residential High Density General Plan designation. The applicants and the Redevelopment Agency are requesting a General Plan amendment to increase the number of units to 69, in order for the project to be financial feasible. Although the Multiple-Family Low Density designation allows up to 11.9 units per . acre, the proposed project would have a density of 10 units per acre. See Figure 2 for the Existing General Plan Land Use Designations for the subject sites. V. ZONING The subject property recently changed from Commercial to the P-1 Zoning District established for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area. The zoning designation is depicted on the map listed as Figure 4. VI. GROWTH MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS The public entities that serve the subject sites are: Water California Cities Water Sewer Delta Diablo Sanitation Police Contra Costa County Sheriff Department Local Parks Ambrose Park and Recreation District Regional Recreation East Bay Regional Park District Fire Contra Costa Fire District Schools Mt. Diablo Unified School District The subject sites are currently within all necessary public service districts and they have an obligation to provide service to each site. The proposed change in land use designations under this General Plan Amendment would not result in a substantial increase in the local population and the contemplated uses would not place additional demand on existing public services. The General Plan Amendment would not result in violations of the growth management standards contained in the County General Plan. VII. POLICY CONSIDERATIONS The policy considerations related to this General Plan Amendment request deal with the both the Land Use and Housing Elements of the General Plan, and the Bay Point Redevelopment Plan. The following is a discussion of the appropriateness of the proposed land use designation for the site: Land Use Policy 3-95 of the County General Plan include the following related guide to development: o Upgrade community appearance by encouraging development of new uses to replace antiquated developments. 3 o Achieve and maintain a healthy environment for people and wildlife, that minimizes health hazards and disruptions caused by the production, storage,transport and disposal of toxic materials. o The Board of Supervisors adopted a Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point area in December 1987. All development proposals should be reviewed by, and coordinated with, Redevelopment Agency staff to ensure compatibility with the Redevelopment Plan. Additionally, involvement with the redevelopment process will allow the County to coordinated concurrent development proposals and to possibly facilitate the construction of public improvements that will further the goals of the Redevelopment Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment is related to a subdivision and development plan application to develop an infill site into housing. The site was previously used as an automotive junkyard that separated two residential neighborhoods. The site has been cleaned and is ready for reuse,pending the land use entitlements. The property is currently owned by the Redevelopment Agency and is proposed for development in coordination with a nonprofit housing developer to develop an affordable housing component on an adjacent site. • Housing Goal #13 is to increase the supply of housing with a priority on the development of affordable housing. As mentioned above, the development of this site (69 single-family residences) is in conjunction with the development of 51 affordable multiple-family residential units. The full proposal represents a development of mixed income housing. • Housing Goal#6 is to provide adequate sites through appropriate land use and zoning designations to accommodate the County's share of regional housing needs. The site is an ideal infill site that,when developed,will connect two separate neighborhoods. The site design is the result of a Community Planning process that was conducted to determine the best use development for the site. • Housing Goal #7 is to mitigate potential governmental constraints to housing development and affordability. The Redevelopment Agency has been working to address potential governmental constraints in order for the project to move forward. The Redevelopment Agency assembled the land necessary for the project. A community planning process, sponsored by the Redevelopment Agency, was conducted to determine the most appropriate development for the site. In addition,the Redevelopment Agency has invested substantial capital into the neighborhood to construct curbs, gutters and sidewalks. The proposed project involves four phases, of which two have been completed. The third phase of the infrastructure project will be constructed in 2003 and the forth phase will be constructed as part of the proposed project. 4 Development of housing within the Bay Point Redevelopment Project area has been stagnant for several years. The infrastructure project as well as the proposed project will stimulate additional housing development in the redevelopment area. • The Redevelopment Plan for the Bay Point Redevelopment Project Area includes such objectives as: assisting in the development of new affordable housing, strengthening existing residential neighborhoods, and providing infrastructure improvements The proposed General Plan Amendment and subsequent development of the site would meet these objectives by assisting in the development of 69 single-family residences and 51 affordable multiple-family residences. Development of a vacant infill site will strengthen the existing neighborhoods to the west and east of the site by providing connectivity to each of the areas. In addition, the proposed project is linked with Phase 4 of the North Broadway Infrastructure Program,which provides for a street network connecting two neighborhoods, paves an existing gravel road, and provides storm drainage and sewer services currently lacking for the existing residences on Fairview Avenue, adjacent to the site. In terms of growth management issues, as noted above in IV. Growth Management Considerations,the subject site is an infill development site that is served by public services and the subsequent development of this site under the new ML designation is unlikely to place a strain on public services. VIII. CITIZEN GROUP ACTIONS TO DATE The Bay Point Project Area Committee (PAC) and the Bay Point Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) considered the request for the General Plan Amendment and unanimously recommended its approval. IX. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the subject site under this General Plan Amendment request be re- designated as follows: Re-designate portions of APN:096-020-084, portions of 096-020-086; 096-020-003, 096- 020-0775 096-020-068 and 096-020-081,bounded by Fairview Avenue to the west,the future extension of Pullman Avenue to the north,Bella Monte Avenue and the rear property lines of existing residences along Bella Monte Avenue to the east and Willow Pass Road approximately 200 ft. to the south from Single-Family Residential High Density (SH) to Multiple-Family Residential (ML) on the Land Use Element Map (as shown on Figure 3: Staff Recommended General Plan Amendment); 5 Attachments Auachmen Figure 1: Map Showing Location of Sites under General Plan Amendment Request Figures 2: Map of the Existing General Plan Land Use Designations for the Subject Sites Figure 3: Staff Recommended General Plan Amendment for the Subject Sites Figure 4: Zoning Map for Bay Point Redevelopment Area 'TOP TH BROADWAY ARF " BAY VIE vNf HOUSING DEVELOPMEI GENERAL FLAN AMENDMENT STUDY AREA FIGURE 1 . a z Z � E lit o N m PULLMAN w J -�, PULLMAN AVE, o a N 9.9'so•w 30.s J AVE. 0% 764c w k Go e8 Sb ` s Y N p z — ,� m r. CA a > m 01 x 4 -� A"W iff s/ 1!C 5G c PITTSBURGM AVE. I107>. c O r4s.se 1 � =' (n® 1 Iia�e m yell < h ki cD o, 1-�9.. "far sB o 0 N I v° z z m o p �f�f 141 LU ILL:7 Si iNO n 11131 %A @ 0 1 $ b AV I.. Co cl rn X11 ` 1— P't mw oa SRO Ag� Ln ti_ m ac Z. N ~ Q rn � we rr �S m m �s. m C•m e sy'� e rr e32 C t."its t--.-� hi m �Q 4 m ti AA � to al N W a• b ! 36 D I6-- 6Ce.f.7 50 124.49 - , - (1� �i1S9�O•Z'� es �+ �rt• _ N4Ao1�Q��= L��7 ' 4 �� 36 _ ;481, b STATE HIGHWAY � 0 WILLOW PASS RD.r � � to r- n -- CO �O NOR'. 113r )ADWAY NEIGHBO - PLAN AMENDMENT GENERAL EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS FIGURE 2 77777 7-fff STATE HIGHWAY(WILLOW PASS ROAD) 0 45 90 180 270 360 111111111111t 1111111111t N Feet Legend 0 Parcels This map contains copyrighted information.Reproducing all or any IN! SH(Single Family Residents-High) portion of this map is an infringement of copyright law.Users of this N Map Created on February 27,2003 map agree to read and accept County of Contra Costa disclaimer Contra Costa County Community Development Study Area of liability and warranties provided herewith.This map was created 651 Pine Street,4th Floor•N.Wing by the Community Development Department.This map was created Martinez,CA 94553-0095 r PR(Parks and Recreation) by the Community Development Development Department using 37.59.48.455"122:06:35.384W M-5(Mixed Use) base map data from the Public Works Department. M ` � NOR" 113' ) -IQ D GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS FIGURE 3 17 g lig�� ,f •Es '.°� - {� �i a �� tf.5'ta� e3 '`t�}S 4 vzl., l.. -'� 4'. ?�"4 C'.�= 3.< :'rte t• 4` '4 ':i.', i m Y h � ....{..- �`, e:. .?' ..a✓ fih.. ..[} .� : �e s , ,a. v M-5 f / R 1� a a ,t .k a y ¢ ,. � • ... ..fes. r.. c a ,. x ..j6q:.x _ i-.,w"..a. ♦..:�.. _: ., .:' "{i Z .'.�>.. S f�..t K .. r _ _... ,......:.::_�.. _...*fit ..-t5's.,t. � .,_ _._i. s .. ... r..�. ..... '...r°.,-. ,-. -..:.. ? �`• .... - ', . ,... � .. .'.:•x-.Y ... _. Y ...it..'•e 'k S i..; �::�-_r '! to ... aY .3:_. c` .d£. ; r eT.,7{4k. �R"=4P .- .- .. --, : y. .. >,., Y';, x._,.. ... ,.:,. �..:. 6,......?•, :�.. .sY-.. .'s 3- , f5' . ..'Y„� - R „x' '.. ��6 .ac,a fit'y'"y � - �.t f `✓ .s: �,1 ,o ,k. 4 A LOW SS ROADj HIGHWAY p E r •.. �� y {A 4 \. 1 y� °^ _�f•�"k F t L� y9�. b� �L i �� . .v3�" •x� L - �r 4 0 45 90 180 270 360 Legend Feet Parcels SH(Single Family Residents-High) This map contains copyrighted information.Reproducing all or any portion of this map is an infringement of copyright law.Users of thisw I Map Created on February 27,2003 L Study Area map agree to read and accept County of Contra Costa disclaimer �V Contra Costa County Community Development ML(Multiple Family Residents- ow) of liability and warranties provided herewith.This map was created 651 Pine Street,4th Floor-N.Wing by the Community Development Department.This map was created Martinez,CA 94553-0095 Q M-5(Mixed Use) - PR(Parks and Recreation) by the Community Development Development Department using 37:59:48.455N 122:06:35.384W base map data from the Public Works Department. T. D +-� .-. c D rs c cF � m E Ca 7 w .Zr N E 2 �_ g oN Q tLl v v_ gt} 43) Ln Q g c d C •• `' _ a tv O m iy LL t�L C �N LL. U. LL. 4- 6t) a - Y 0 Q1 � _ U? � � N � O N �r _a _a a c m c m V s (l3 a- �- it 11--' :. Q Lull CL Ca CL� n O 41J. Ua: N T co�- C z �f "vii � Y) E Q � w _ 2 c CL U} U) t 4 U U = 0 0- CL 3 cn a '$ ��"''(]''�`J1\//�'�V•'t/{jam/�/f]�)�J( , y 1 NMI g -a Oil Q Z+4 G C �a cc 6 to N ,. N if F O ; 0 �-- ---,� - CL ` _aG 21 N m 41 � pzo41 c coo W G.III km- h E SolN co moms, max. W I 2(3G c.) x Z t� Z f. r Community Dennis M. Barry,AICP on ra ent Director Development Department County County Administration Building ��-sE L �� -�==--:�-=:U�. FEB 4 2003 651 Pine Street •./r� =•• I 4th Floor,North vying -. [WE A � CLERK Martinez,California 94553-0095 SL � T (925) 335-1250 - `~ ;TP e ru - ,O;b3 Phone. Y ;- . S7a c ....-�� :.o.twaxr-+a:.:-_F ra'r--r-. ss.r'-s�nrLri:x.i=.•rc..._.... NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION County File General Plan Amendment#2002-02, Development Plan#DP023067, and Subdivision#8703 (The O'Brien Group-Single-Family Residential Project); Development Plan#DP023068 and Minor Subdivision#MS020021 (Resources for Community Development-Multiple Family Residential Project); and modification to DP003003 (The Bay Point P-1 Development Plan) Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the"Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended to date,this is to advise you that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: THE O'BRIEN GROUP AND RESOURCES FOR CO TY DEVELOPMENT (Applicants) and CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Owner), The project area is approximately 9.3 5 acre property(APN 096-020- 003/068/077/078/079/081/084/085/086/087/088/089)fronting the north side of Willow Pass Road,between Fairview Avenue and Bella Monte Avenue,-in the Bay Point area of east Contra Costa County. The proposed project involves a General Plan amendment(from Single-family high density to Muliple-family low density),a 69- lot Subdivision and Development Plan for the northern 7-acre portion of the property in order to develop 69 single-family residences. The Bay Point Area-wide P-1 proposal would also be modified to reflect the proposed project. The project also involves a minor subdivision to combine five parcels into one parcel and a Development Plan for the 2.35-acre portion of the site adjacent to Willow Pass Road to develop 51 multiple-family residential units,a daycare and a small retail use. The proposal also includes a Disposition and Development Loan Agreement between the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency and the O'Brien Group and Resources for Community Development Department. Potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics,geology and soils,hydrology and water quality,traffic,and noise, have been identified in the initial study. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all documents referenced be reviewed in the offices of the Community Development Department,and Application and Permit Center at the McBrien Administration Building,North Wing,Second Floor, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, during normal business hours. Public Comment Period-The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to 5:00 P.M., Thursday,March 6,2003. Any comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address: Maureen Toils,Principal Planner Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,North Wing,4th Floor Martinez,CA 94553 It is anticipated that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration will be considered for adoption at a meeting of the East County Regional Planning Commission on Monday,March 10,2003. The meeting is anticipated to be held at 7:00 pm at the hearing is anticipated to be held at 7:00 p.m.at the City of Antioch Council Chambers,2121 H Street,Antioch,CA. It is expected that the Planning Commission will also conduct a hearing on the application at the same meeting. Interested parties may contact staff at the above number to confine the time and date of the hearing. Maureen Toms,AICP Principal Planner Office Hours Monday - Friday: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment#2002-02, Development Plan# DP023067,and Subdivision#8703 (The O'Brien Group- Single-Family Residential Project); DP023068 and MS020021 (Resources for Community Development- Multiple Family Residential Project); and modification to DP003003 (The Bay Point P-1 Development Plan) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,North Wing-4th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Maureen Toms (925)335-1250 4. Project Location: The project area is approximately 9.3 5 acre property(APN 096-020/003/068/077/078/079/081/084/085/086/087/088/ 089)fronting the north side of Willow Pass Road,between Fairview Avenue and Bella Monte Avenue, in the Bay Point area of east Contra Costa County. 5. Project Sponsor's Name: The O'Brien Group and Resources for Community Development _ 6. General Plan Designations: Mixed-Use(M-5);and Single-Family High-Density(SH)- existing(Multiple-Family Low Density proposed) 7. Zoning: Commercial and Multiple-Family Residential (existing), and Planned-Unit District(pending) 8. Description of Project: The proposed project involves a General Plan amendment, 69-lot Subdivision and Development Plan for the northern 7-acre portion of the property in order to develop 69 single- family residences. The Bay Point Area-wide P-1 proposal would also be modified to reflect the proposed project.The project also involves minor subdivision to combine five parcels into one parcel and a Development Plan for the 2.35-acre portion of the site adjacent to Willow Pass Road to develop 51 multiple-family residential units, a daycare and a small retail use. The proposal also includes a Disposition and Development Loan Agreement between the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency and the O'Brien Group and Resources for Community Development Department. 1 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The site is located on the north side of Willow Pass Road, between Fairview Avenue and Bella Monte Avenue in Bay Point. The proposed site was a junkyard that has been remediated. A take-out food business is located on the site, along the Willow Pass Road frontage. The areas to the east and west are existing residential neighborhoods. The area to the north is the railroad tracks and vacant railroad-owned property. The Willow Pass Road mixed-use corridor is located to the south. State Route 4 and the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station are located approximately one mile to the southwest. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required(e.g.,permits, financing approval,or participation agreement): A Development and Disposition Agreement between the Redevelopment AgetLcy and the developers is needed. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning V Transportation/ Public.-.S.6rvices Population&Housing Circulation -Utilities& Service ✓ Geological Problems Biological Resources Systems Water Energy & Mineral ✓ Aesthetics Air Quality Resources Cultural Resources Mandatory Findings of Hazards Recreation Significance I/ Noise DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ✓ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one 2 effect(1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Approved by: � Z t.E P-A, February 14, 2003 Maure Toms,AICP Date CCC Community Development Department SOURCES In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation,-the following references(which are available for review at the Contra Costa-County Community Development- ,-E5-1 Pine,Street 5th Floor-North Wing, Martinez)were consulted: 1. Contra Costa Resource Mapping System-Quad Sheet Panels -Honker Bay,CA 2. The(Reconsolidated) County General Plan(July 1996)and EIR on the General Plan(January 1991) 3. General Plan and Zoning Maps 4. Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan and EIR(June 2002) 5. Bay Point Planned-Unit District Rezoning and Design Guidelines(Adopted February 11,2003) 6. North Broadway Infrastructure Plan and Negative Declaration(December 4, 1997) 7. Response to the County's RFP for the Eight-Acre Tnfill Residential Development Site(May 2002) 8. Project Description and Field Reviews 9. Traffic Impact Analysis for Bay Point I Development(February 11,2003) 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Source 4,5,6,7,8) b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?(Source 2,5,6,7,8) C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Source 2,5,8) d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?(Source 8) SUMMARY: The majority of the site is a former junkyard that-has been remediated. A take-out food establishment is located along the Willow Pass Road frontage of the site. Many areas along Willow Pass Road in Bay Point have views of the Sacramento/San Joaquin River,including the stretch of roadway fronting the proposed project. The proposed project was designed with two unobstructed north-south roads,so that these views would be preserved. The proposed project will not substantially damage scenic resources,such as trees,rock outcroppings, and historic buildings,as these features are not found on the site. The architecture of the proposed project is compatible with the design of the existing neighborhoods. Light and glare that will be produced from the proposed project will be similar to that of typical residential neighborhoods,which is not significant. Impact (I-1): The project proposes to introduce additional exterior lighting to the area, which includes residential uses. Mitigation Measur30 days prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator a Lighting Plan. Light standards shall be low-lying and exterior lights on the building shall be deflected so that lights shine onto applicant's property and not toward adjacent properties; all subject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of a building permit. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce this impact to less than significant. 4 Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model(1997) prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts - on agricultural and farmland. Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland or Farmland or Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (Source 1,2,3,8) b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source 11,25318) C. Involve other -changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Source 13,21318) SUMMARY: The site is not associated with any agricultural uses, the proposed use will not impact agricultural resources. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact III. AM QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relief upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan(Source: 1,2,3,8) b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? 5 (Source 1,2,3,8) C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (Source 1,2,3,8) d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Source 1,2,3,8) e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?(Source 1,2,3,8) SUMMARY Short-term emissions and,objectionable odors are generated during construction activities,but they are or and temporary. To minimize this impact,the Conditions of Approval for the project require the use of properly tuned and muffled equipment and the elimination of any unnecessary idling of machines when not in use. In addition, a Condition of Approval regarding dust control measures will be incorporated into project. Potentially significant Impact, Potentials Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant N. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,polices, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source 192,354)536,8) b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Source 19293941,53,628) C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Source 152,314951,618) 6 d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) f. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Source 1,2,394,5,628) SUMMARY: The County Resource Mapping System,the Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base,and the Contra Costa Water District Interim Service Area Listed Species Occurrences and Potential Habitat Map, showed no unique,threatened, or endangered species of plants or animals in the project area. Plant life in the project area consists of non-native grasses and weeds and some shrubs. The site was previously used as a junk yard but has recently undergone remediation, thus the site has very poor habitat value. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in§15064.5? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?(Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?(Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Source 1,2,3,4,5A,8) SLTNUVLkRY: According to the California Historical Resources Information System, there is a low possibility of archaeological resources and flirther study is not recommended. However, it remains conceivable that presently undetected an/or unanticipated cultural resources of significance may be encountered at one or more places within the subject property during the course of construction. In the event cultural resources are encountered during consti-uction, the standard conditions of approval require all eartlu-noving activity in the area of the find cease until a qualified archaeological consultant examines the 7 findings, assesses their significance and offers a proposal for any procedures deemed appropriate to further investigate and/or mitigate adverse impacts to those cultural resources which have been encountered. This Condition of Approval is consistent with State and Federal law. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -Would the project? a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury, or death involving:- - 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? (Source 122,314,59618) 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?(Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) 4. Landslides? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?(Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,liquefaction or collapse? (Source 1,2,354,5,638) d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?(Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) SUMMARY: According to the County Resource Mapping System,Antioch loam is found in the project area. Runoff from these soils is slow to medium and erosion hazard is slight to moderate where the soil has been exposed or tilled. The project temporarily increases the exposure of the soil to wind erosion during the 8 construction phase,but this impact is minor and temporary. Adherence to standard dust control and erosion control practices including, but not limited to general watering of exposed areas and/or use of chemical stabilizers will avoid this impact. These measures shall be incorporated into the construction contract. PotentiaRy Significant Environmental Effect (YI-1). Strong to violent earthquake ground shaking on active fault zones in the region could cause significant damage to improvements,and in extreme cases, loss of life. Mitigation-Measures*LVI-1): Require geotechnical investigations to mitigate effects of engineered fills, settlement and liquefaction. 1. Engineered fills in the planning area shall be properly designed and adequately compacted(i.e. minimum 90% relative compaction as defined by ASTI D1557) to significantly reduce both seismically induced and natural fill settlement. 2. All roads, structural foundations and underground utilities shall be designed to accommodate estimated settlement without failure. 3. Final design of improvements shall be made in conjunction with a design level geotechnical investigation submitted to the County for review. The investigation shall include deep borings and evaluation of liquefaction potential and the report shall estimate the magnitude of differential settlement. If a high liquefaction potential exists, the report shall include measures to control drainage, including measures aimed at controlling damage to buildings, buried pipelines and-., surface parking. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact incorporated Impact No Impact VH. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERLkLS- Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the envirom-nent through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the enviromnent?(Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) 9 C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Source 112,354251658) d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65862.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?(Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. (Source 152,354259628) f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) g.. Impair implementation of -or physically T ✓ interfere with an adopted emergency response - plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source 192,314,52618) h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source 1,213,4,5,628) SUMMARY: The project has the potential to release hazardous substances, such as accidental petroleum spills, during construction. These potential impacts are minimized to a less than significant level with standard safety practices (i.e., installing sufficient signs waiving about construction and detours,marking of underground lines before trenching,etc.). 10 Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY- Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Source: 122,33,4159618) b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering ofthe local groundwater table level(e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (Source: 1,2.,3,,4,5,6,8) C. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of-a-stream or river, in a manner,- which Would result.M* substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-sfte? (Source: 1,,2,3,4,,5,6,8) d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) f Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) 9- Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?(Source: 1523354,516.18) h. Place wig a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) i. Expose people or structures to a significant 11 risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (Source: 152,35425,6,8) j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8) SUMMARY: The site is not located within a floodplain or located near a body of water where water-related hazards to people or property could result. The applicant will be required to collect and convey runoff, as specified in Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. This will result in additional runoff to the drainage facilities and could result in the discharge of silt from the project site into the storm drain system during construction. The following mitigation measure reduces this impact to a less than significant level. Potentially SiLynificant Impact(VIII-1): The proposed project could result in the discharge of silt from the project site into the storm drain system during construction. Mitigation Measure(VIII-1): At least 30 days prior to the issuance of a grading permit,an erosion control plan shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Grading Section of the Building Inspection Department. The erosion control plan shall provide for the following measures: All grading, excavation and filling shall be conducted during the dry season(April 15 through October 15) only, and all areas_of exposed soils- shall be-replanted to_minimize erosion and subsequent sediment4agn,-�-#fix--Q-ctober 15:,the grading ennit.shall.allow only erosion cantrol work. Any modification to the above schedule shall be subject to review by the Grading Section of the Building Inspection Department and the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce this impact to less than significant. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,758) b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ✓ policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including , but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Source 152135455,65718) C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural conununity conservation plan? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) 12 SUMMARY: The proposed project is located between two existing neighborhoods. The development with link the two neighborhoods through two east-west cross streets. In addition,the design of the project is such %.1 that it will be compatible with the existing neighborhood. The proposal included a general plan amendment to increase the density of the single-family residential site from single-family residential(5-7.2 units per net acre)to multiple-family residential(7.2-11.9 units per net acre). Due to the provision of the affordable units,the project is eligible to receive bonus units,as permitted through the County's Density Bonus Ordinance. Under the existing Single-Family Residential High density general plan designation the single-family site is allowed up to 5 3 units,with the density bonus. The General Plan Amendment will allow up to 79 units,with the density bonus. The proposed project involves 69 single- family residences. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the Redevelopment Plan, as well as the Housing Element of the General Plan. Although the site was zoned commercial, a County-initiated rezoning effort was recently approved. The rezoning program results in consistency with the General Plan. As part of the consideration,the area-wide rezoning and development plan would need to be updated to reflect this project. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact X. 14INERAL RESOURCES . Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?(Source: 11293,4) b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Source: 1.2,3,4) SUMMARY: Due to the nature of the project and the site description,the proposal will not result in impacts to mineral resources. Potentially significant Impact Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact incorporated Impact No Impact XI. NOISE . Would the project: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standard's established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (Source: 1,2,3,4,56,7,8,9) 13 b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?(Source: 1,2,3,4,56,7,$,9) C. A substantial permanent increase in ambient _✓ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Source: 19293,495697,899) d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5 6,7,8,9) e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 1,2,354956979819) f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 12293349569778,9) SUMMARY: Short-term noise levels would increase during construction. However, standard conditions of approval that include restricting construction hours,traffic flow and heavy equipment usage will reduce the noise effects. Incorporation of the following mitigation measures will reduce noise impacts to a less than significant level: Potentially Significant Environmental Effect(XI-1). Short-term noise level increases at sensitive locations in and surrounding the Specific Plan area would be expected during periods of heavy construction. Mitigation Measures*(_M-1): Implement County construction noise policy luniting construction to the hours of 7:30 AM— 5:00 PM Monday-Friday, unless modified by the Zoning Administrator. Require construction contractors to include measures to reduce equipment noise such as: • All internal engine-driven equipment shall be equipped with mufflers that are in good condition; • Use'quiet'gasoline-powered compressors or other electric-powered compressors wherever possible. • Retain a disturbance coordinator to monitor construction activity and to identify additional mitigation measures as needed,consistent with the impacts and mitigation measures identified in the EIR. 14 s Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or directly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source 1921314,5,6,8) b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source 13,293,4159618) C. Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?(Source 1,2,34,5,6,8) S Y: The project development plan proposes a 69 single-family units and 51 multiple-family- units on a vacant infill site in the Bay Point Redevelopment area. According. to the General Plan, the population increase from the single-family residences is expected to be approximately 207 people(based on 3 people per household). The population increase from the multiple-family residences is expected to be approximately 128 people(based on 2.5 people per unit). Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES -Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, 1. Fire Protection? 2. Police Protection? 15 a • 3. Schools? 4. Parks? 5. Other Public facilities? SUMMARY: The proposed project is within existing urban boundaries served by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, County Sheriff s Department,and the various County Departments serving the area. Fire Station#86 is located approximately one mile west of the site. The Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department is responsible for police protection in the Bay Point area. The Pittsburg Police Department could serve the site at the request of other police departments under a mutual aid agreement. The project area is served by the Mt.Diablo Unified School District. The proposal was forwarded to the Mt. Diablo unified school district and the district had no comments on the proposed project. All new residential developments are required to provide school impact fees. The total fees collected would be available to add portable classrooms and support other educational needs to offset the impacts of the proposed project. The development would result in greater use of existing parks and recreational facilities and an increase the need for additional parklands and recreational opportunities. Park dedication fees are required per County Ordinance for residential projects. The fee is used to provide parks/recreational opportunities within the area and would offset any impacts to parks. _ Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIV. RECREATION- a. Would the project increase the use of ✓ existing neighborhood and-regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) b. Does the project include recreational facilities _✓ or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Source 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) SUMMARY: The parks in the vicinity are highly utilized for a wide variety of recreational purposes. The • development would result in greater use of existing parks and recreational facilities and an increase the need for additional parklands a recreational opportunities. Park dedication fees are required per County Ordinance for residential projects. The fee is used to provide parks/recreational opportunities within the area and would 16 offset any impacts to parks. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (Source 1,2,3,4,56,7,8,9) b. Exceed,either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Source 192,324956,79829) C. Result in a change in.air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change- in location that results in substantial safety risks?(Source 1,2,3,4,56,7,8,9) d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? (Source 122,3,4,,56,7,8,9) e. Result in inadequate emergency access? (Source 1,2,3,4,56,7,8,9) f Result in inadequate parking capacity? , (Source 1,2,3,4,56,7,8,9) 9. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Source 12223,49561718,9) SUMMARY: The proposed project site is located along Willow Pass Road,east of Bailey Road in the Bay Point area of east Contra Costa County. The applicant plans to develop a largely undeveloped piece of land between Fairview Road and Bella Monte Drive,north of Willow Pass Road and replace it with 69 single family homes,51 multi- family homes,900 square feet of retail and a 2,000 square feet day care center. The Project would provide 294 on-site and 91 off-site parking spaces.The proposed project would generate 1,194 daily vehicle trips with 125 during the A.M.peak hour and 150 during the P.M.peak hour. 17 J According to the traffic report prepared for the project,the Tri-Delta Transit Agency provides bus service in the study area. The bus routes 380 and 387 travel on Willow Pass Road adjacent to the project site. Route 380 operates every 30 minutes on weekdays,while Route 387 operates approximately every hour on weekdays. The routes terminate and begin at the nearby Pittsburg/Bay Point BART station on Bailey Road thus providing a feeder bus connection to regional transit. BART runs regular service with 15 minute frequency on a route to San Francisco and Colina during regular commute tunes. Bus stop locations are also indicated in Figure 3. There is a bus stop located nearby the project site on Willow Pass Road at Fairview Street. Project development would generate approximately 110 daily transit trips but would not affect the load factor on the BART Concord Line. According to the traffic report,the project development does not degrade the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities and the proposed development includes pedestrian facilities. The parking requirements for the project were determined based on County Code requirements,prior to the area-wide rezoning adoption. The County has no parking regulation for Day Care Centers, and calculates the requirement based on the number of employees and children. The on-site parking requirement is calculated at 256 spaces . The project description indicates a total of 234 on-site parking spaces and 160 off-site spaces.only on-site parking spaces are considered for compliance with Contra Costa County parking requirements. Therefore,the proposed project would provide 22 fewer on-site parking spaces than requited. It is estimated that 25 percent of the retail and day care patronage would be by on-site residents. In _addition,parking demand would be-shared 4t ie peak demands.dispersedcLthrouagh the day due to the mixed-use nature of the project. The demand for the-affordable multiple-family'project is also reduced due to the income levels of the residents,lower auto ownership rates and increased dependence on public transportation. In addition, off-site(on-street)parking would be provided along Willow Pass Road, Fairview Street,and Bella Monte Avenue adjacent to the area where the on-site parking deficit would occur. These factors would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. According to the traffic study, the Delay Index(DI) on Willow Pass Road is below the 2.0 County standard. The project would increase the DI from 1.35 to 1.36 during the a.m,peak hour and from 1.32 to 1.33 during the p.m.peak hour. This is not a significant impact. A traffic study was prepared for the project and included'and an assessment at the following intersections based on the trip generation criteria of 50 peak hour trips. The trips were distributed using the CCTA East County cumulative model and the following intersections were identified for analysis: 1. Bailey Road and Willow Pass Road 2. Fairview Road-Madison Avenue and Willow Pass Road 3. Bella Monte Avenue and Willow Pass Road 4. Seasons Drive-Loftus Road and Willow Pass Road 5. Bailey Road and Canal Road(West) 6. Bailey Road and SR 4 west-bound ramp-Canal Road(East) With existing traffic volumes,no signalized intersection exceeds the County level of service standards. The two unsignalized intersections do exhibit LOS F conditions on the stop controlled left turns(primarily due to the high through-volume on Willow Pass Road),but the turn volumes are so low that they do meet peak hour signal warrants and installation of a traffic signal is not required at this location. It is possible 18 that an unsignalized intersection will not meet signal warrants,but will have one or more movements that experience LOS F operations. Level of service F can be indicated for a very low volume of vehicles at a stop sign. Although these stopped vehicles may experience long delays,there would not be an overall benefit if the higher number of vehicles on the major street are stopped in favor of the few vehicles on the minor street. The signal warrant considers a balance between major street and minor street delays,and may indicate dicate that there is overall benefit if drivers on the minor street continue to experience long(LOS E or F)delays. The peak hour signal warrant was evaluated for all unsignalized intersections that have a movement operating at LOS D,E or F. Turn volumes at the intersections of Fairview Street-Madison Avenue/Willow Pass Road and Bella Monte Drive/Willow Pass Road are not high enough to meet the peak hour signal warrants during both AM and P.M.peak hours. However, installation of a signal could be *installed to reduce these impacts. Signal timing and synchronization with other signals will enable the higher number of vehicles on Willow Pass Road to move through the area. Potentially Significant Environmental Effect(XIV71). Project development would degrade traffic operations at two unsignalized.intersections.Project traffic would have the following effects on two unsignaaed intersections. Fairview Street-Madison Avenue/Willow Pass Road- where: * The northbound left turning movement is operating at unacceptable levels(LOS E during the a.m.peak hour and LOS F during the p.m.peak hour), * The southbound traffic movement is operating at an unacceptable level(LOS F during the p.m. peak hour), and • The project would increase the total traffic volume entering the intersection by more than one -percent G b-11-a114 A vmteAvenue.-/WflIwPass Rod -where: • The southbound reft-through movement is operating at unacceptable levels(LOS E during the a.m. peak hour and LOS F during the p.m.peak hour),and the project would increase the total traffic volume entering the intersection by more than one percent(1%),and, a The northbound traffic movement is operating at an acceptable LOS D during the p.m.peak hour without the project, and the project would result in an unacceptable LOS E. Mitigation Measures* (XW-1): Add a second southbound lane at the Fairview Street-Madison Avenue/Willow Pass Road intersection. Alternatively,a traffic signal would mitigate the impact-to a less than significant level. Although the installation of an unwarranted traffic signal could adversely affect traffic flow on Willow Pass Road,timing and synchronizing the signals would reduce impacts to Willow Pass Road resulting from a signal installation. Potentially Significant Environmental Effect(XIV-2). In 2025,project development could degrade traffic operations at two signalized intersections. The project would cause an increase in the V/C ratio at the following intersections: BaileyRoad/Willow Pass Road-where the service during the p.m.peak hour would be at LOS D and V/C=0.89 without the project, and the project would increase the V/C to 0.92. Seasons Drive-Loftus Road/Willow Pass Road-where the service during the p.m.peak hour would be at LOS F and V/C= 1.38 without the project, and the project would increase the V/C to 1.39. Mitigation Measures* 03�c-2): The following measures would provide acceptable operation at the two intersections where the LOS would be unacceptable without the project, and the project would cause in increase in the V/C ratio. The measures would also be required to provide acceptable operations without the project. 19 c Bailey Road/Willow Pass Road—add a second right turn lane for the northbound Bailey Road approach. The mitigation measure would provide LOS C(V/C=0.80)operations during the a.m. peak hour and LOS D(V/C=0.81)operations during the p.m.peak hour. Seasons Drive-Loftus Road/Willow Pass Road—add a through lane(with shared right turning movements)for the eastbound and westbound Willow Pass Road approaches. The mitigation measure would provide LOS C(V/C=0.78)operations during the a.m.peak hour and LOS C (V/C=0.79)operations during the p.m.peak hour. These mitigation measures should be considered by the County for implementation within a program, such as the Area of Benefit program. Potentially Significant Environmental Effect(XIV-3). In 2025,project development could degrade traffic operations at two unsignalized intersections, as follows: Fairview Street—Madison Avenue/Willow Pass Road— where: • The northbound right turning movement would operate at unacceptable levels(LOS F during the p.m.peak hour)without the project, • The northbound left turning movement and the southbound traffic movement would operate at unacceptable levels(LOS F during the a.m. and p.m.peak hours)without the project, and • The project would increase the total traffic volume entering the intersection by more than one percent(1%). Bella Monte Avenue/Willow Pass Road— where: - - • The northbound traffic movement and the southbound left-through movement would berate-at unacceptable-levels(LOS F during find.m. and p.m.peak hours)without the project, • The southbound right turning movement would operate at unacceptable levels(LOS F during the a.m.peak hour)without the project,and • The project would increase the total traffic volume entering the intersection by more than one percent(1%). Mitigation Measures* (XIV-3): Add a second southbound lane at the Fairview Street—Madison Avenue/Willow Pass Road intersection. Alternatively,a traffic signal would mitigate the impact to a less than significant level. Although the installation of an unwarranted traffic signal could adversely affect traffic flow on Willow Pass Road,timing and synchronizing the signals would reduce impacts to Willow Pass Road traffic resulting from a signal installation. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS-Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Source: 1,2,3,4,8) - b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or 20 expansion of existing facilities, the construction or which could cause significant environmental effects?(Source: 1,2,3,4,8) C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (Source 1,2,3,4,8) d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlement and resources, or are new -or expanded entitlement needed?(Source 1,2,3,4,8) , e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (Source 1,2,3,4,8) f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?(Source: 1,2,3,4,8) g. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations. -related to solid waste? (Source: 1,2,3,4,8) SUMMARY: The proposed project is within existing urban boundaries,served by various utilities,including PG& E, Telephone companies, Cal Cities Water Company, Delta Diablo Sanitation District, and Flood Control District. Since the proposed project is within the service boundaries,the project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies,or substantial alterations to the utilities. Potentially significant Impact, Potentially Unless Less than significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact ;VII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE o a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish and wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? (Source: 21 1121314,59617,& 8) b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a'project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? (Source: 112,314,55617,& 8) C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? (Source: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, & 8) SUNEVLARY: The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,significantly impact biological resources(see#IV-Biological Resources)or eliminate major period of California history or prehistory(see#V-Cultural Resources). Traffic impacts that are cumulatively considerable as a result of the proposed project have been identified. Mitigation Measures have been identified under XIV-Transportation/Traffic. Mitigation measures identified under.I-Aesthetics, III-Air Quality, VI - Geology and Soils, VII-Hazards and Hazardous Materialsi VIII _11ydw1D.gy_and Water Quality,X1-Noise,and XIII-Public Services will ensure that adverse effects on huxn=— beings will be reduced to insignificant levels. 22 0 ju V (�m i ��¢ at 0 d .0 9L a OL-1 . !3 Q o g4 mt • bigt.. Or vi V,� (.� $ .44 D•• '.K W s n U r+ �g tt� R � �a V Wei UZI NIN 's. ppi o B -----------------T------------------- -------•--------------- ----------- CWOZ!ssvd MOIIVA I ' 1 I ' I ' tt . I I I I . �-- - W I j j I i- .------------:- C] LU C Lu I I Z c N01551W9n5 SNCL d0123'dd IDN I � us �.. C -- WEST-WEST—AVENUE ------- .� _ I i ,�-.--------------_— I j t�szus nil am 00 ftd Irg mend — Q I ' ----------- ._-� -•�� ! __ '' � •� til f -- 4-M •--- W ----.-- -------- - { I __ --- - ---------�----- L------------------ - PITTSBURG-AVENUE- -i :3h i I ' a. I � I ( I ! I 0 V V-0—• %J CD CD =C) 4— 0 0. owe o=�um+ bm C C4 .................... *MY 3U-40t-�n�e ---------------- 1-D X IV IV 4 r7tm I CE71 1=7 uz UA LU uj* LIZ Cw) -C) m6j >1 IL C4 LL. 41* MWO CL. Iw ip VIM. P.. CCM C=l it C= E=L-1 C=l RM A I or • l-LL ir.V LL. N-- -01 !-JX jrm OWE am. mm MAM999 0 MI c S NGIAdWad a) 0-5 d b0 G y .✓G •" tp G. o dipbri G h O G"d ty,.r• bA ca ,3 p O N .•- p o o- •otptoa cu a? •c� co- co c, to o o v <- d 'C. b a tso s-- ° cn 00 r• o o d o 4 �:.��. p 4•cts t�� ca o to o G G'"• °?� 00 tn CD 0 O a O �•' y G'� .y N N ' .. a N y O G cd N ,..�.... N p„ ,•- O N •t3 O �% a•G�'O m O G O N V 3r,, tt� ,d �_ y�r .r+ o•i N �' •''p` O' y y�' G•V 0 w 0• .Q 5 �G p m G au. G to 0-0 Iwo too 0-0 G NG 7. 7t0N'0 tjT Q- m 3 N N O Z;Aal �6 �v •F-+ •O G G t4 a7 CL•fl O •O ..- 4)•4 N �d Cay td 7 c3tp G G N .�- aG.� 0 o is•� - v y ca o � C3� cy G- y-Q s% �i'?l O G •G t�„ W► N G d �► ? � y G G y.✓ ,, tA ,r O ,,. C4 ✓ t3.Za •C3 O G 0-0 N cn• G css y G . t'S O o O AZ. o G O N G a� d�V ca' G is .G- G O to t1 V y V p N O p. .G 'g �,,'',s w% 4� 'N to to A-G 0,�,,-N C t4 ?► o N G to tp Q y id t�4 G a 0 V_ •t3 O. 7►,a7 N y••�. t3�. C. W0. o � t0 o t4 O G c4, d d :) 0 p2�y •G 7, ?G •- ',� N a) y�� GON Gs N, Gp3NLL► t� t4 to.•- O C3 4 y ? v ,�,•tv) d d tD•G a N G,G G 0 ty•N�*- . .,� o•.D N Ga qtr U ca s-yo N N a - Or •'' � FWD � �'��•�S tQ � y to••t? y y cd tp N 0) - 0,0 a N yS O �► ' 'N tS r N G G- ��, O O o a a?`' o ., O o ov ooa 0-•G G '7 p y ay O 41 tt) O +-'4 'O_G G G ✓ fl G _ 't, i N o • �, m o G 4 N J � V c � Q N w bA Z � cu oo o soL o.-o o�► a So '� C p cGv C) y (DCO eVcoCD w o b4 c 0o��a o o o �0 CD c = C:N o ••- �,,, co C-'C (D cNoac-oov o 0 -0 moo@ �bo oorn° N COto o- o o � C► C O) N two a 0 0 Cl) o co r-as� y p a .o `. CO co N tX3 d Qo a .s�)00 Nce)eq ON N o�ycn�� eL a bo p O cn c d" d©t!?t•.1 co 0 co O CT c� XM C 0, S 0 O•�,_ r' C )1,C 3 Gc o C y� N'o � tU T3 w,,. •C eL �-p C a� co � 3 04 -,A too ,i";- C 0) 50, °n►�o' o E�so°•oc.'NtO-N as•oa'� Ck 10 cvcaao � cac=s� ° c vo �cv.n► �.r3o G � 0 ccs cot � C s•C•p er �ems- N �N N m 3 :4?•C N= L d•N �' M �o N to.... 'p L. 4) ;'. �►13- N tt3 G Ny.0 d�'o�,._�...o• • •�oN' N G-p• •'�>d-omCr'Ato o. � °O.o to fiL ,GN-pG oo`•`- �C � vc No ,M- 0 No oOUt151o 00Os1U_ a UO). C7 aa C ° ° o 0 ' : °� G ° ra o ° - o ccs cu.o v ,0 N s' 012 '0 coU .�oR G o•0 tp ja (A *Vj E V) 0)ON N ..0 to D.� U) - �a a 0 ja (1)�o -5 ol up V) V 0 (D 0 L •o co�a �•- cum — 0 0.;C - �� c o-N C•a -v� o N °'M� �'o-°a o ° °�.� 050 c© o 0 0 o ..ow y C.0 G ° o,o zg,c�,•� o� G N a� Noor =` CD 60 U. ;$ � Q N 13-0 C S N v ay 'ta-�•� Q1 C CO •C V C� o o °� v v u�t0 0).,zc �' �o 0 V a'� oVG ? •� N_ 8tom/) N'� d? U N Q �sN� p Z� O C � � 'oa0.coc 'ooaco� � � acoaci cE oco CE oco cF _o co ° aE� >,� E oaE�, >,� E oo- � E E o � > v or E o � > ° 0= E H > v ° � 0 0 0 C_ O O co O C_ co m co O C_ ca E > MD0Mc. E > a-0o cl E > a'U0.0a o 0 0 0 M M 0 0 0 0 O O>M 0 0 0 0 0 v)= O CIA) 4- 46 o � orn Ove V C V C 0 c C'p .,.r C'0.,r O C:aCo Cc M �. O o O j 'C (0-0 C) 'C 0 .0 a) 'C to OO .N M a Q_N O O. Q..y co O. L_ .r c ++ a to M IM O+r C .O M O E C O Q U p E C Q C� p E C C � E co QE 2E cow E 2Eoo '' E O N C C �o C) 0 cn C p Q N y 0 0 C O Q 0 �- M coo >'o 4- rn o O > 0 0 �- o� coo >'0 0 0 c E— > C E— a� c E— > w o ��` o co Z Do �° c�� c7t~o� to z CC.0 NCD MC�oM Nc Loo !oo C) z 0o Loo iCD N NN N `Nco `NN N NN Qo°°Qoo .> oo°°'> 00o Qo°0Qo0 0CLa0cna. -o4►- CL 134-Una. 0CL cna. U(] 1U20 000 Q020 Ua 20 _o p O N L p N `� N a) `o - N �' co C 40-L O C p-C N p O E C L Q p O 'fl O .-..�+% O O O 0 p Q 0� 0 C7 C) 'a o a .-. E 0 .,.., c ,cn o E V c a m ay °. E 4" c=.W o c— CD m co 'DoCLc0 ° ccc) o � oCL cc � o 'a0CL c ° cc a) O 0 � co� � L O� O a. co iC � ` 4? y= 0 a? ` co CIO n..c c•v >.op•o o �— n.°� >,c}; °— o a� c� �ao'o0 =.- � Epo•vM� �'c �'S � Ea�� Om in on v, N'M � Eoo� co� � cNM CD � "- c E °� ai co c 00 oL o0 V NCOQ cc Ii OQ ICL c �C o C • a) co� °Nm o Utn Q c� . U) ._ co s cvav w0-.0o .L5 E M M CL cm 00 c co O 0 Cc 0 0cn o° E3 °La o� v,CL s M Cc Co wmoEc'Ln � o a•-aw � omc� v� L- 0 ,= 'M 3 > >L� c�nO•c = o0 o.c a � � L > a� —L�-� � Ec�, > a� �� o boa, � 'cc O-W � c > ° o c M 0 .. .c � � �CO,�� "acccnT eco .yam v, ° O.rN cv�ca� N� ° co aoiE� oc-co== o O c 4-- _ OW MtM E9)0 c r�•�V s >2 a) co O N O Q} w'N V V V y G3 0•R3 C p ` M L Q O Wit— am OCD OH OO Ru O O U•� C p m U:.c U:.0 (1)M •o c 0•N A2 C0 0 O O O 0 O _v °—! ca-0 M V) CD ... .0 C t0 4.4 � O O C ° O E y a O C3 CL O 0 U E y 3a- °D a.03:in 00 'o a'y`•- 3a- O o ac a� 3 � o .rO �� y v0c �' a� 3 � 0 U- Li.Z° �� .a�Fa' co ° �n '� ovi•Z° m� co cn c o y ca O y a�.o u-� m o a.�� a a A 0 U- M o O ,�V ` C O O D C.OZ CD C— N 3p L C O 0 O > _ N Ohm to co m > 0 I ZCN Cf) F— X X x } f REQUEST To SPEAR FORM " (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT)_ Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. Name: 1)ebC(A- Phone: ' 312, ..�..�� Address: SO f, d VDr- city: K9 � I am speaking for myself or organization: -oj,)LA-- r &t'ut 46� � orp i eco , rfu fh (name of organii tat i ons CHECK ONE: _. I wish to speak on Agenda Stem # _ �� Date* My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM � �3 (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. Name: EiP Phone 6 S6 3'7-? 0 3 0 cD Addressi�v�,�/,tf� city .6 MlPr6l-o Zip Code: 2yy� ��, I am speaking for myself or organization: O"i3gle7U a?ftup (name of organization) CHECK ONE: I wish to speak on Agenda Item# Date:-- My Comments will be general for against I wish to speak on the subject of Ido not wish to speak on the subject but leave these comments for the board to consider: