Concord City Council
October 24, 2023

1 COUNCILMEMBERS
Laura M. Hoffmeister, Mayor
Edi E. Birsan, Vice Mayor
Dominic D. Aliano
Laura M. Nakamura
Carlyn S. Obringer
Civic Center
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, CA 94519
www.cityofconcord.org
Regular Meeting of the
Concord City Council
Tuesday,
October 24, 2023
6:30 p.m. - Open Session Council Chamber
1950 Parkside Drive
and/or Various
telephonic/electronic
locations
*IMPORTANT NOTICE ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENTS AND MEETING PARTICIPATION* Members of the public are invited to attend and participate at: Council Chamber, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA.

Please note the following change to the City’s public comment procedures: Unless a Councilmember is participating in the meeting remotely pursuant to AB 2449, remote public comment will not be accepted. Public comment may be provided in-person or via email, as set forth below. Members of the public desiring to provide comments as a part of the meeting are encouraged to either submit written comments by 3:00 p.m. prior to the meeting or to attend the meeting in person.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE
The public is invited to participate in the City Council meeting using any of the following methods:

1. IN PERSON:
a. Members of the public can provide in-person comments in the Council Chamber.

Members of the public are encouraged, but not required, to fill out a speaker card. The Council Chamber will have seating available for members of the public to attend in person up to full seating capacity.

2. REMOTE: Remote public comment will not be accepted, except when a Councilmember participates remotely pursuant to AB 2449. At the time of the posting of this agenda, none of the Councilmembers have notified the City Clerk’s Office that they intend to participate remotely pursuant to AB 2449, and therefore no remote public comment will

AMENDED AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.B
ADDED TO AGENDA –

CHANGES HIGHLIGHTED IN
BLUE
2 be accepted at the meeting. If, after publication of this agenda and before the meeting begins, any councilmember determines that they will need to participate remotely due to just cause or emergency circumstances under AB 2449, their remote participation will be announced at the outset of the meeting in connection with the Roll Call item. If a Councilmember participates in the meeting remotely pursuant to AB 2449, the public may participate and provide public comment remotely, as follows:
a. Zoom:
https://cityofconcord.zoom.us/j/85930468185?pwd=mpGtnj2fbwfIsPVCZWRY2epsng4je g.QXC-aqalQ3CH_fDO or Zoom Webinar ID: 859 3046 8185 and Passcode: 573483 b. Zoom Phone Numbers. Dial Toll Free: (669) 900-6833 or (346) 348-7799 or (253) 215- 8782.
c. During the meeting, each period for public comment will be announced, and participants may use the “Raise Hand” feature on Zoom to request to speak. If calling in via Zoom use *9 to raise and lower your hand. The meeting host will call on you, by name, and promote you to panelist in the webinar so you can be seen via your camera. Please enable your microphone when it is your turn to speak. In order to ensure the orderly administration of the meeting using this method, providing your name is encouraged, but is not required. (If you need instructions on how to use this feature, please contact the City Clerk by 3:00 p.m. of the meeting date at [email protected]).

3. EMAIL:
a. Public comments can also be submitted via email to [email protected]. Please note that emailed comments will not be read aloud by staff. Any public comments received up until 3:00 p.m. of the meeting date will be:

1. distributed to the Council before the meeting,

2. posted online for public inspection at
https://stream.ci.concord.ca.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Meetings/Search, and

3. inserted into the meeting record.
b. As emails containing public meeting comments are part of the official record, note that personal contact information may be published if it is included with your email.

4. TO WATCH OR LISTEN ONLY:
a. Watch on TV on Comcast Channel 28, Astound/Wave Channel 1026, and AT&T U-verse Channel 99
b. Watch the TV broadcast through the City’s website by following THIS LINK c. Watching Live Streaming of the meeting by following THIS LINK d. Join the Zoom webinar by following THIS LINK
3 OPEN SESSION

1. OPENING
Roll Call – Announcements/Consideration and Approval of Requests by Councilmembers to Participate Remotely Pursuant to AB 2449 Pledge of Allegiance – Vice Mayor Birsan

2. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
This is a 15-minute Public Comment Period for items within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction that are not on this agenda. Each speaker will be limited to approximately three minutes.

State law prohibits the City Council from acting at this meeting on any matter raised during the Public Comment Period. Please see “How to Participate” above.
a. Written Public Comment

3. PRESENTATIONS
a. Presentation – by Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Deputy Chief Aaron McAlister providing an update on District activities. Introduction by Mayor Hoffmeister.
b. Proclamation – to Susun Kim, Family Justice Center, proclaiming October 2023 as "Domestic Violence Awareness Month" in the City of Concord and recognizing the Family Justice Center for its work against domestic violence.

Presentation by Mayor Hoffmeister.
c. Presentation – an update on the Family Justice Center by Susun Kim, Executive Director. Introduction by Mayor Hoffmeister.
d. Presentation – on John Muir Community Health Fund by Executive Director Jelissa Parham. Introduction by Mayor Hoffmeister.

4. ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. Announcing – one (1) opening for the City of Concord's representative on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority - Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC); and setting a deadline of Friday, November 17, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. for applications to be due to the City Clerk. Report by Joelle Fockler, City Clerk.

5. CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
The public is entitled to address the City Council on items appearing on the Consent Calendar before or during the City Council’s consideration of the Consent Calendar. Adoption of the Consent Calendar may be made by one motion of the City Council, provided that any Councilmember, individual or 4 organization may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.

If a request for removal of an item from the Consent Calendar has been received, the Mayor may defer action on the particular item and place the same on the regular agenda for consideration in any order s/he deems appropriate. Please see “How to Participate” above. a. Considering – approval of the minutes from the October 3 and 10, 2023, City Council meetings. Recommended by the City Clerk.
b. Considering – adoption of Ordinance No. 23-9 entitled, "An Ordinance Amending the Concord Municipal Code Title 15 Building and Building Regulations, Chapter 15.75 (Floodplain Management)." Ordinance No. 23-9 was introduced on October 3, 2023, by reading of the title only and waiving further readings. Recommended by the City Clerk.

6. CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM
The public is entitled to address the City Council on items appearing on the agenda before or during the City Council’s consideration of that item. Each speaker will be limited to approximately three minutes. Please see “How to Submit Public Comments” above. a. Considering – appointing Councilmember Nakamura or holding a recruitment to appoint a member of the public as a City of Concord representative to the John Muir Community Health Fund for a term ending December 31, 2026. Report by Joelle Fockler, City Clerk.

7. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
Persons who wish to speak on Public Hearings listed on the agenda will be heard when the public hearing is opened, except on public hearing items previously heard and closed to public comment.

After the public has commented, the item is closed to further public comment and brought to the Council level for discussion and action. Further comment from the audience will not be received unless requested by the Council. No public hearing shall commence after 10 p.m. unless approved by majority vote of the City Council. Please see “How to Participate” above. a. Considering – adopting a Resolution denying the appeal of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. 23-08 PC and approving the Buttonwood Village Subdivision Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and eight reductions of development standards, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for a small lot development with 14 single-family detached homes on a 1.67- acre site located at 1836 Clayton Way, APN 114-220-019 (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR, RT), subject to conditions of approval. Report by Michael Hart, Associate Planner.

CEQA: The project is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (“In-fill Development Projects”). .

8. CORRESPONDENCE
Correspondence received at the City Council meeting will be listed here on the Annotated Agenda.

9. REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
5 Closed Session Announcements
City Manager or Staff Reports
Council Reports

10. ADJOURNMENT
Next Meeting: Regular Meeting
Date: 11/7/2023 6:30 p.m.

NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in the Superior Court to certain City administrative decisions and orders which require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence, and the exercise of discretion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6). Further, if you challenge an action taken by the City Council in court, you may be limited by California law to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in the hearing or in a written correspondence delivered to the City Council prior to or at the hearing.

In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and California Law, it is the policy of the City of Concord to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including those with disabilities. If you are disabled and require a copy of a public hearing notice, or an agenda and/or agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format; or if you require other accommodation, please contact the ADA Coordinator Tianjun Cao at (925) 671-3243 or [email protected], at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Advance notification within this guideline will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.

From: frank sterling <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 8:20 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Lynched at Concord BART? Timothy Charles Lee 2nd Annual Memorial Walk in Concord Thursday Nov 2nd
Greetings Joelle,
My name is Frank Sterling. I sent a handful of documents yesterday to you at the city council. I was told I needed to ask you to please include the documents in the council’s "packagefor public comment" and that way it would officially be "on the record".

Thank you, if possible, please let me know you received this email..

Frank Sterling
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023, 11:36 PM frank sterling <[email protected]> wrote:

Greeting Mayor and City Council. I want to alert you and invite you to the 2nd Annual Memorial Walk For Timothy Charles Lee. Many of you know the name. He was found hanging in a fig tree at Concord BART in 1985. Our family an many others never believed he committed suicide and we beleile to this day that Timmy was killed in a racist anti gay attack, and his murder was covered up.

I want to share with you some of the evidence of the day and ask you to take the 5 or 10 minutes it will take to look at these select documents. I sifted and I continue to sift through hundreds of documents so you won't have to. I contacted the Stanford Special Collections Library and got the remaining evidence digitized so we can all see it so you didn't have to.

I urge you to look at these documents then agree or not agree to sign onto a community letter asking California Attorney General Rob Bonta to work to Reopen the Case of Timothy Charles Lee. In the past during the time my cousin Timmy was killed, there is proven KKK activity in Concord and Contra Costa County, including police officers. It is all in the documents.

I am attaching a select few of the documents, there are dozens if not hundreds more I am still reading through with a small group of dedicated helpers.

If you only have a moment, I would look at the PDF titled Original facts Flyer. It will lay out the facts in a brief summary. Including the destruction of important evidence, A handwriting expert, and marks and burns on Timmy's body.

Read the Affidavit from a neighbor close to BART who heard screams from the BART parking lot and went to investigate. She says she saw a uniformed officer among the crowd in the BART Parking lot who chased her. That is the Affidavit of Marilyn Hannum.

Written Public Comment
Agenda Item No. 2.a
October 24, 2023

2.a

A woman who called the NAACP said she knew who held a gun to Timmy's head but was afraid to speak to police. In other articles I have it says she fears the police and a motorcycle gang.

Read the short article titled A Gun Held to Timmy's Head. The 3rd column, second paragraph is her statement.

If you don't think the police could be involved or part of the KKK. Read this article in the Conta Costa Time titled "The Klan in Contra Costa; Area Police Recruited for Klavern" it was written by staff writer, Kelly Gust in 1977, just 8 years befor my cousin was killed and his death ruled a suicide. In the article two of the four klansmen interviewed, stated they were local police and that they were actively recruiting more police and people in general. Read the article, it's all there, The suicide note that Timmy allegedly wrote misspelled his own name along with his brother and sister. A handwriting expert says it was either not Timmy or if it was he was under duress, here is one of the many articles, it is titled Handwriting Expert. I have found her. She is still alive and stands by her statements.

At the time of Timmy's killing/death it was believed by many it was a hate crime that was covered up. Many people still believe that today. You all at this time have the chance to take a second look. To help bring justice and healing to our family and the community. I hope you chose to sign onto our letter.

I have attached all the short articles at the bottom of the page. I hope you take the time to look at them.

Lastly I have attached the fliers for the upcoming event, I hope you all can attend.

Sincerely,
Frank Sterling, Timmy's cousin

Fire, Rescue, EMS
Update
City of Concord City
Council
October 24, 2023
Deputy Chief
Aaron
McAlister

3.a

- Countywide fire,
rescue, EMS &
ambulance service
- One of the largest
special fire districts in
California
- Dedicated to
preservation of
resident life and
property
Your Fire “Department” at a Glance

About Our District - Crews and Facilities
● 500+ Employees
● 34 Fire Stations and
37 Crews
● Fleet of 250
Specialized Vehicles
● Specialty Programs
● Expanded Service
Area
Specialty Programs
Serve Our Residents
- Ambulance
Transport Alliance
- Aviation
- Crew 12
- Fire Dozer
- Fire Investigation
- Haz Mat
- Health and Wellness
- K 9 – Search & Arson
- Marine
- Rescue
- UAV
- FEMA Urban Search
& Rescue

What’s New
● East Con Fire Annexation Complete
● Serving Pinole and West County from Fire Stations 73
& 74
● Crew 12 Countywide, Year-Round Resource
● Residents Wildfire Mitigation Projects Program
● Fire Stations 4, 86, and 95 Opened Last Year
● Construction Plans for Three New Stations Underway
● SAFER Grant Adding B8/B9 Crews in 2023
● K9 Program – Accelerant Sniffing Baxter Joins Team

What’s New
● First-Ever Official Fire Chaplain
● Crew 12 welcomed their new Buggy, New
Personnel Transport Bus
● Firefighter Promotions & 20-Plus Year Service
Awards
● Town Hall Meetings
● Asst. Chief Jeff Peter Deployed on FEMA
Mission to Maui
● Matt & Scott Annual Memorial Service
● 9/11 Annual Firefighter Memorial Service

Detailed Look at the City of Concord

Detailed Look at the City of Concord

Wildfire Threat
● Longer, less predictable fire weather
trend continues
● Reflected in Fire Threat Zone changes
● Indicators point to dangerous fire season
● No area of county is risk free, Contra
Costa County far from immune to danger
● Many resources available to residents:
○ Wildfire Mitigation Program Projects
○ Residents Guides to Prep and Evacuation

Changing Wildfire Threat Zones – Concord
● Minimal wildfire threat in
city limits
● Considerable threat to the
east and west
● Vegetation fire threat still
significant in city
● View “live” threat maps at
confire.cc/cccwildfirethreat

Fire Safety for Residents ● Residential fires pose continued risk in our communities
● Modern home fires burn faster,
hotter, and with more toxic
smoke
● Simple steps can save lives: ○ Working smoke alarms on all floors, in every bedroom
○ Carbon monoxide alarms ○ Sleep with bedroom doors
CLOSED
○ Have a family evacuation plan;
practice it
● Much more at www.cccfpd.org

Questions?
References

Susun Kim & Natalie Oleas

C E N T R A L C E N T E R

3.c

Family Justice Center
• 9 law enforcement
agencies
• 9 public agencies
• 47 community
partners
Crisis support,
long term safety,
community
building
Collaborative
partnerships allow
victims to get
connected to
resources more
quickly.

Clients Served

Trauma
Recovery
Center
2022
118 Clients
2023
74 from Central Center
154 Clients (as of 10/24/2023)
2022

Child
Counseling 2021 (4 from Concord)
86 children
(11 from Concord as of 9/30/2023)
75 children
2022
2023
(5 from Concord)
62 children

Lawyers for
Family Justice
296 clients served at Central as of 9/30/2023
59 restraining orders applications as of 9/30/2023
2022
2023
308 clients served at Central
84 restraining orders applications at all centers
879 clients assisted at all centers

TeleCARE
Free telehealth services, including free prescriptions.

Recently brought on the Contra Costa EMS system and
Contra Costa Fire (37 fire stations) approved the connection with TeleCARE.

DV & Gun
Violence
Campaign

Our Future
New, permanent home for the Central Family Justice Center

Holiday Toy Drive
Starting now!
Donations accepted through December 1st.

City of Concord
Presentation

JELISSA PARHAM, MPH

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OCTOBER 2023

3.d

Background &
Focus Area • What is today the Community Health
Fund, came into being in 1997 when
the merger that created John Muir
Health called for developing and
funding an independent “community
health benefit nonprofit
corporation”.
• Focused on improving the health and
well-being of people with low-
incomes and underserved individuals
residing within central and east
Contra Costa County communities.
• Distribute grants and partner with
community-based, nonprofit
organizations to create sustainable
health initiatives that address social
determinants of health (root causes
of poor health)

Impact + Strategy
▪Invested over $32M since 1997
▪Provides $1M in grants to community partners
annually
▪Equity Commitment
▪Focus on start-up/new organizations with a
potential to collaborate with additional
organizations and expand impact

2023 Funding

Board Member Requirements
▪Live and work in East and Central Contra Costa
County
▪Care about making health care and wellness
services available to underserved populations
▪Have time to deliberate, learn, and make
decisions with the other board members
▪Experience as a director and/or officer on
community-based nonprofits boards
▪Relevant volunteer and employment
experience

Staff Report
Date: October 24, 2023
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Prepared by: Joelle Fockler, MMC, City Clerk
[email protected]
(925) 671-3390
Subject: Announcing one (1) opening for the City of Concord's representative on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority - Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC); and setting a deadline of Friday, November 17, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. for applications to be due to the City Clerk.

Report in Brief
In accordance with Policy and Procedure No. 89, this announcement initiates a recruitment to fill one (1) position for the City of Concord’s representative on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority – Citizen’s Advisory Committee. Applications are available on the City’s website.

Recommended Action
Announce one (1) opening for the City of Concord’s representative on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority – Citizen’s Advisory Committee, and set a deadline of Friday, November 17, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. for applications to be due to the City Clerk.

Background
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority – Citizen’s Advisory Committee (CAC) is comprised of 19 City/County appointees and six (6) members appointed by the Authority. The CAC is seeking a member willing to serve a four-year term ending in 2027. Claire Linder was appointed to represent the City of Concord on August 27, 2019, and reappointed in August 2021. Ms. Linder’s term expired on August 27, 2023, and she did not reapply. A recruitment for this position was held between August 9 and September 8, 2023. The recruitment did not result in an acceptable applicant pool, so another recruitment is being held.

4.a

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
October 24, 2023
The CCTA-CAC serves the Authority by reviewing and commenting on transportation policies and issues broadly affecting Contra Costa County. Their role includes reviewing compliance checklists submitted by the jurisdictions in fulfillment of growth management requirements, and advising the Authority on strategic policy issues pertaining to the ongoing business of the Authority.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted. A news release will be issued and distributed.

The announcement will be televised on the Concord TV Cable Channel 28 (Comcast), Channel 1026 (Astound/Wave), and Channel 99 (AT&T U-verse) Community Bulletin Board. The news release will be posted at the Concord Senior Center, Concord Police Department, the Concord Library, in the City’s agenda display case, on the City’s website, and via social media.

Attachment

1. CCTA-CAC Role and Function

Contra Costa Transporta�on Authority – Ci�zens Advisory Commitee Role and Func�on
The Contra Costa Transporta�on Authority (CCTA) maintains the Ci�zens Advisory Commitee (CAC)to provide ci�zen perspec�ve, par�cipa�on, and involvement in the CCTA’s $3 billion voter-approved Transporta�on Expenditure Plan and Growth Management Program. The CAC is comprised of 23 members: 20 are appointed by each of the 20 local jurisdic�ons within Contra Costa County (the ci�es, towns, and the County), and three “at-large” members appointed by CCTA who shall reflect community and business organiza�ons and interests within Contra Costa County (for example, a Contra Costa resident interested in bicycling issues, or a resident with environmental concerns). Members shall not serve in a representa�ve capacity with respect to their appoin�ng authori�es (in this case, CCTA) or any specific organiza�on.

Mee�ngs are scheduled for the fourth Wednesday of the month at 6:00 p.m. and are held at the CCTA office located at 2999 Oak Road, Suite 110, Walnut Creek, CA (directly across the street from the Pleasant Hill/Contra Costa Centre BART Sta�on). CAC members are appointed to serve for a four-year term without compensa�on. Members will, however, receive reimbursement for travel expenses to and from the CAC mee�ngs if they have completed Ethics training and Sexual Harassment Preven�on training and have a current cer�fica�on on file with CCTA staff. CCTA staff will provide the resources to complete these trainings.

Fair Poli�cal Prac�ces Commission (FPPC) Form 700: In accordance with CCTA’s adopted Conflict of Interest Code, PCC members are required to file an FPPC Assuming Office Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests with the Authority. Form 700 statements are due within 30 days of assuming office and leaving office, and annually by April 1st. For more informa�on regarding the Form 700, please visit the FPPC’s website at htp://www.fppc.ca.gov/index.php?id=500.

Attachment 1

CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC)
BYLAWS
November 29, 2006

1.0 NAME AND AUTHORIZATION
The name of this organization shall be the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC was authorized and established pursuant to Ordinance 88-01 as amended.

2.0 PURPOSE

2.1. The purpose of the CAC is to provide citizen perspective, participation and involvement in Authority policy development and implementation.

2.2. Subject to the direction and concurrence of the Board of Directors of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (the Authority), the CAC may engage in related activities as appropriate to the discharge of its responsibilities, and bring matters of public concern to the attention of the Authority. The CAC shall identify and educate themselves on transportation issues of regional, countywide, and local concern.

The CAC shall report to the Authority on those issues deemed of importance to the CAC. The Authority may also assign issues to the CAC for its review, comment and recommendation.

2.3. The CAC shall provide recommendations to the Authority regarding matters of interest and concern to the community.

3.0 MEMBERSHIP

3.1. Each of the cities, towns, and the County of Contra Costa shall appoint one member to the CAC. In addition, three (3) members shall be appointed by the Authority as “at large” members. Members shall be selected to reflect community and business organizations and interests within Contra Costa County. Members shall not serve in a representative capacity with respect to their appointing authorities or any specific organization.

3.2. At the discretion of the respective appointing body, CAC members are subject to recall at anytime.

3.3. Members shall be appointed for four (4) year terms. There shall be no limit on the number of consecutive terms which a member may serve. To assure continuity, membership terms should be staggered and should overlap.

3.4. The CAC shall encourage prompt filling of vacancies.

3.5. Except as noted in Section 8.0 below, CAC members serve without any compensation.

Citizens Advisory Committee Bylaws
November 29, 2006

4.0 OFFICERS

4.1. The Officers of the CAC shall be a Chair and a Vice-Chair. Their duties shall be as follows:

4.1.1. Chair: Presides over CAC meetings; develops the monthly meeting agenda; appoints subcommittees and subcommittee chairs; and reports the CAC's actions and decisions to the Authority as appropriate.

4.1.2. Vice-Chair: Presides over the CAC meetings in the absence of the Chair; conducts the other duties of the Chair in his/her absence.

4.2. Election of Officers shall be made as follows:

4.2.1. Chair: The Chair’s term of office shall be for one calendar year. The Chair shall be elected each year at the last meeting of the calendar year by a majority of the CAC members present and voting, and shall serve until replaced by a newly-elected chair. If the term of appointment of the Chair expires before the year is out, and that member does not seek or accept reappointment, the Vice-Chair will serve as Chair until the following January.

4.2.2. Vice-Chair: This officer shall be elected by a majority of the CAC members present and voting at the last meeting of the calendar year. The term of office shall be for one year. If the term of appointment of the ViceChair expires before the year is out and that member does not seek or accept reappointment, the Committee will hold an election for a ViceChair to serve out the remainder of the term.

5.0 MEETINGS

5.1. The regular meetings of the CAC are generally scheduled for the fourth Wednesday of each month at 6:30 p.m. in the Authority offices at 3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 100, Pleasant Hill, California 94523.

5.2. The CAC meetings and subcommittee meetings are subject to the Brown Act.

5.3. A quorum is defined as a majority of currently appointed members.

5.4. Any member who is absent for four (4) of any twelve (12) regularly scheduled consecutive meetings shall be subject to termination. Any resulting vacancy shall be filled for a new four-year period. There are no provisions for alternates to serve as substitutes for CAC members who are unable to attend a CAC meeting.

5.5. The rules contained within the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order (Newly Revised) shall govern the CAC in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws, the Authority’s Administrative Code, the Authority’s Office Procedures Guide, and any special rules of order the CAC may adopt.

Citizens Advisory Committee Bylaws
November 29, 2006

6.0 SUBCOMMITTEES

6.1. The Chair may establish Subcommittees and Ad Hoc Committees as necessary.

6.2. Each subcommittee shall consist of at least three (3) CAC members appointed by the CAC Chair and reappointed annually.

6.3. A Growth Management Compliance Checklist Review Subcommittee may be created, and its members appointed from the CAC membership by the CAC Chairperson with the concurrence of the full CAC. The subcommittee, if constituted, shall be charged with responsibility for reviewing and making recommendations to the Authority and any appropriate standing committee of the Authority with respect to Growth Management Checklists which have been submitted to the Authority by the Cities and the County in accordance with requirements of Ordinance 88-01 as amended and the applicable sales tax expenditure plan.

6.3.1. Normally, the subcommittee’s recommendations will be forwarded to the full CAC for review and recommendation for approval. In the interest of meeting timetables, however, the report and recommendations of the Growth Management Compliance Checklist Review subcommittee may be submitted directly by the Checklist Review subcommittee to the Authority and/or any appropriate Authority standing committee. In such event, the report and recommendation need not be reviewed or approved by the full membership of CAC.

6.3.2. When the full membership of the CAC reviews reports and recommendations made by the subcommittee, such review shall comply with the Authority timetable for review of the Checklists.

6.3.3. Questions or requests for additional information from a local jurisdiction shall be communicated from the CAC to local staff through Authority staff.

7.0 AMENDMENT OF BYLAWS
Amendment of these bylaws requires a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the CAC members present and voting at any regular meeting of the CAC, and subsequent approval by the full Authority Board.

8.0 REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAVEL EXPENSES
If authorized by the Authority, CAC members will be reimbursed for travel expenses incurred for transportation to and from regular and subcommittee meetings of the CAC. Such reimbursement shall be consistent with the Authority’s Administrative Code and Office Procedures Guide.

If applicable, payment will be issued quarterly based upon members’ signed verification of mileage on a monthly Meeting Attendance Log.

Citizens Advisory Committee Bylaws
November 29, 2006

9.0 COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTING

9.1. The primary channel of communication for the CAC shall be through written and oral reports from the Chair of the CAC to the Authority or its standing committee.

9.2. Reports from the CAC to the Authority should reflect the consensus of the CAC.

If consensus has not been achieved, the Chair shall convey to the Authority that the CAC position reflects a majority vote, and the Chair shall acknowledge and convey minority opinions.

9.3. CAC members are encouraged to report back to their appointing Councils or boards on at least an annual basis and more frequently if warranted.

10.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST

10.1. There shall be no monetary gain by members of the CAC as a result of their membership and actions on the CAC.

10.2. CAC members shall recuse themselves from discussion and voting on issues in which they might have a financial interest or benefit.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CONCORD CITY COUNCIL

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
1950 PARKSIDE DRIVE

CONCORD, CALIFORNIA AND VARIOUS

TELEPHONIC/ELECTRONIC LOCATIONS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2023
The Concord City Council met in a regular meeting in the Council Chamber, located at 1950 Parkside Drive and via various telephonic/electronic locations at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 3, 2023, with Mayor Hoffmeister presiding. The pledge of allegiance was led by Councilmember Nakamura.

Minutes follow in abbreviated form per Resolution 3361 and Council Minutes of September 26, 1966.

ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Edi Birsan, Laura Nakamura, Carlyn Obringer, Laura Hoffmeister
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Dominic Aliano
STAFF PRESENT: Susanne Brown, City Attorney; Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager; Joelle Fockler, City Clerk; Stefanie Ananthan, Deputy City Clerk; Greg Taylor, Director of Information Technology; Mark Bustillos, Chief of Police; James Nakayama, Police Captain; Kevin Marstall, Director of Community Development; Karan Reid, Director of Finance; Carlton Thompson, City Engineer; Bernard Enrile, CIP Manager; Bruce Davis, Senior Civil Engineer; Deyuanne Lei, Associate Civil Engineer; Justin Bosch, Associate Civil Engineer

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
WHO ADDRESSED THE COUNCIL: Judith Herman, Concord; John Manov, Concord; Ady Olvera, Concord; Nikita Rodgers; Hasan Sukarto, Bay Point; Gwynne Gilson, Concord

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Judith Herman, Concord, spoke in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

John Manov, Concord, spoke about a previous Code Enforcement issue related to the storage of his boat trailer on his private property; he asked City Council to consider an amendment to the current Municipal Code related to storing commercial vehicles on private property.

Ady Olvera, Concord, spoke in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

Nikita Rodgers spoke about a serial rapist in Concord, and the importance of transparency.

Hasan Sukarto, Bay Point, spoke about the Police Department issuing parking tickets to the patrons of the flea market in Concord on the weekends.

Gwynne Gilson, Concord, spoke in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

PRESENTATIONS

5.a

City Council Minutes October 3, 2023
2 PROCLAMATION – Soroptimist International of Diablo Vista Mayor Hoffmeister presented Jo Harlow, President of Soroptimist International of Diablo Vista, a proclamation declaring October 3, 2023, as “Soroptimist International of Diablo Vista Day” in the City of Concord.

Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period, and upon receiving no public comment, closed the public comment period.

CLEAN ENERGY UPDATE
Mayor Hoffmeister introduced Kiara Donato, Bilingual Community Development Manager with MCE, who presented an update on Clean Energy.

Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period, and upon receiving no public comment, closed the public comment period.

NEIGHBORHOOD RECONCILIATION PROGRAM
Mayor Hoffmeister introduced District Attorney Diana Becton, who presented information on the Neighborhood Reconciliation Program.

Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period, and upon receiving no public comment, closed the public comment period.

ANNOUNCEMENT
RECRUITMENT FOR THREE (3) OPENINGS ON CONCORD’S MEASURE V OVERSIGHT

COMMITTEE
City Clerk Joelle Fockler announced three (3) openings, consisting of two (2) Concord resident positions and one (1) position from either the business community or a Concord resident, on Concord's Measure V Oversight Committee for four-year terms ending December 31, 2027, and setting a deadline of Friday, November 3, 2023, at 5 p.m. for applications to be due to the City Clerk.

CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period, and upon receiving no public comment, closed the public comment period.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES – August 26 and September 5, 2023
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to approve the minutes from the August 26 and September 5, 2023, regular meetings. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 23-7 – Housing Acceleration Development Code Amendments A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to adopt Ordinance No. 23-7 entitled, “An Ordinance amending Concord Municipal Code, Title 18 (Development Code), Chapter 18.405 (Permit Application and Processing) and Chapter 18.415 (Design and Site Review), and adding Chapter 18.402 (Pre-Application Procedures).” Ordinance No. 23-7 was introduced on September 5, 2023, by reading of the title only and waiving further reading. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano

City Council Minutes October 3, 2023
3 ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 23-8 – Accessory Dwelling Units A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to adopt Ordinance No. 23-8 entitled, “An Ordinance amending the Concord Municipal Code Title 18 Development Code, Section 18.200.180 (Accessory Dwelling Units) (PL20005 - DC)." Ordinance No. 23-8 was introduced on September 12, 2023, by reading of the title only and waiving further reading. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano APPROVAL OF REVISIONS TO CITY POLICY & PROCEDURE NO. 34 – Business Meeting Attendance and Travel
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to approve revisions to City Policy & Procedure No. 34, Business Meeting Attendance and Travel – Authorization and Reimbursement of Expenses, which includes converting the policy to an Administrative Directive. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano REAPPOINTMENT TO THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ADVISORY COUNCIL ON AGING – Marilyn Fowler
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to reappoint City of Concord Commission on Aging member Marilyn Fowler to serve on the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging (CCCACOA) for a two-year term ending September 30, 2025, as recommended by the Concord Commission on Aging; and direct the City Clerk to pass the information to the County Board of Supervisors for further action. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano

APPOINTMENT OF YOUTH MEMBER APPLICANTS TO THE PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION – Brandon Betz and Ellis Moore
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to confirm the appointment of applicants Brandon Betz and Ellis Moore to the Youth Member positions on the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Commission for one-year terms, effective September 1, 2023, and ending June 30, 2024, as recommended by the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Commission. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano AWARD OF A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AND APPROVAL OF A BUDGET TRANSFER – Bailey Road Crossing Enhancements (Project No. 2601)
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to approve the following for the Bailey Road Crossing Enhancements (Project No. 2601) located on Bailey Road at Olive Drive and Limewood Drive:

1. Award a construction contract in the not-to-exceed amount of $223,419 to MCE Corporation authorizing staff to utilize the available project contingency for contract change orders up to an additional 15% of the contract amount for the Bailey Road Crossing Enhancements (Project No. 2601) located on Bailey Road at Olive Drive and Limewood Drive; and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, and make the CEQA determinations as provided in this staff report;

City Council Minutes October 3, 2023
4 2. Approve a related budget transfer of $135,000 from Pothole and Base Repair #2, Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556) to Project No. 2601 and associated appropriation of such funds; and

3. Authorize the City Engineer to accept the improvements upon completion of Project No. 2601 and direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS – Oak Grove Road Pavement Rehabilitation – Phase 3 (Project No. 2557)
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to accept the improvements for Oak Grove Road Pavement Rehabilitation – Phase 3 (Project No. 2557); and direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO A TASK ORDER – Ghirardelli Associates A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to approve an amendment to the task order with Ghirardelli Associates, increasing total contract amount by $74,477.60 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $305,564.93 for Whitman Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements Project (Project No. 2513) constructing sanitary sewer work and repaving portions of Whitman Road between Gilardy Drive and Oak Grove Road; and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano APPROVAL OF TASK ORDER #3 – Dewberry Engineers Inc.

A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to approve Task Order #3 with Dewberry Engineers Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $141,627.20 (base agreement of $128,752 plus staff authority to spend up to 10% contingency of $12,875.20 in Measure V Projects funds, Fund 490) to provide construction management and materials testing services for 2023 Citywide Pothole and Base Repair Project (Project No. 2593) constructing pavement maintenance on Willow Pass Road from Landana Drive to Avila Road and Ygnacio Valley Road from Alberta Way to Clayton Road; and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano

APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS TO COMPLETE REPAIRS OF CITY FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE – January 2023 Winter Storm Event
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to approve an appropriation in the amount of $800,000 to complete repairs of City facilities and infrastructure damaged during the January 2023 Winter Storm event which have been designated as FEMA projects under Major Damage Declaration FEMA-4683-DR-CA. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano

City Council Minutes October 3, 2023
5 INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 23-9 – Floodplain Management A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Obringer to introduce Ordinance No. 23-9 entitled, “An Ordinance Amending the Concord Municipal Code Title 15 Building and Building Regulations, Chapter 15.75 (Floodplain Management)” by reading of the title only and waiving further reading. The motion passed by the following vote:

AYES: Birsan, Nakamura, Obringer, Hoffmeister NOES: None ABSENT: Aliano

CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION – Buttonwood Village Subdivision Tentative Map The Mayor announced that the item is continued to Tuesday, October 24, 2023.

CORRESPONDENCE
a. Agenda Item No. 3.b – Clean Energy Update – PowerPoint Presentation b. Agenda Item No. 3.c – Neighborhood Reconciliation Program - PowerPoint Presentation

COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmembers shared information on events and activities in which they had participated since the last meeting and commented on items of interest.

Mayor Hoffmeister reported on her attendance at the League of California Cities Conference (Cal Cities) held in Sacramento from September 20 – 22, 2023.

ADJOURNMENT
By order of the Mayor, the meeting was adjourned on October 3, 2023, at 8:21 p.m. in memory of Senator Dianne Feinstein.

LAURA M. HOFFMEISTER
MAYOR

JOELLE FOCKLER, MMC

CITY CLERK

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CONCORD CITY COUNCIL

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
1950 PARKSIDE DRIVE

CONCORD, CALIFORNIA AND VARIOUS

TELEPHONIC/ELECTRONIC LOCATIONS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2023
The Concord City Council met in a regular meeting in the Council Chamber, located at 1950 Parkside Drive and via various telephonic/electronic locations at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 10, 2023, with Mayor Hoffmeister presiding. The pledge of allegiance was led by Mayor Hoffmeister. Minutes follow in abbreviated form per Resolution 3361 and Council Minutes of September 26, 1966.

ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Dominic Aliano, Edi Birsan, Laura Nakamura, Carlyn Obringer, Laura Hoffmeister (Councilmember Obringer
participated remotely pursuant to AB 2449)
STAFF PRESENT: Susanne Brown, City Attorney; Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager; Joelle Fockler, City Clerk; Stefanie Ananthan, Deputy City Clerk; Greg Taylor, Director of Information Technology; James Nakayama, Police Captain; Kevin Marstall, Director of Community Development; William Tarbox, Director of Public Works; Craig Blythe, Administrative Services Manager; Jeff Rayos, Senior Administrative Analyst; Kit Jory, Parks Manager; Michael Hoesch, Urban Forester; Carlton Thompson, City
Engineer; Bernard Enrile, CIP Manager; Deyuanne Lei,
Associate Civil Engineer; Sophia Huckabay, Housing Manager

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
WHO ADDRESSED THE COUNCIL: Eric Haynes, Concord; Lupe Tolento, Concord; Hope Johnson, Concord; Ady Olvera, Concord; Natalie; Nikita Rodgers
Mayor Hoffmeister requested a moment of silence to reflect upon the recent horrific events in Israel.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Eric Haynes, Concord, acknowledged City Council leadership related to Concord Naval Weapons Station and spoke in opposition to using Americorp as the developer of the Asbury Apartments project.

Lupe Tolento, Concord, spoke in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

Hope Johnson, Concord, spoke in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

Ady Olvera, Concord, echoed Lupe Tolento and Hope Johnson in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

Natalie spoke in support of Zoom public comment during City Council meetings.

Nikita Rodgers spoke about a serial rapist in Concord, and her fear for public safety.

PRESENTATIONS

City Council Minutes October 10, 2023
2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DISTRICT IV UPDATE Mayor Hoffmeister introduced Supervisor Ken Carlson who presented an update on the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors District IV.

Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period.

Natalie expressed appreciation for Supervisor Carlson’s presentation and spoke about the County’s plan to store Greenhouse Gases in the soil through agricultural gardens and planting trees, and inquired if the County can hire an archeologist who could identify archeological assets within the County, and whether other sites should be investigated for preservation.

Ady, Concord, echoed appreciation for Supervisor Carlson’s presentation and inquired if the County has plans to hold a community forum to discuss use for Measure X funds and to give the community an opportunity to discuss potential use of the funds.

Mayor Hoffmeister closed the public comment period.

CITY COUNCIL CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Hoffmeister opened a public comment period, and upon receiving no public comment, closed the public comment period.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES – August 29 and September 12, 19, and 26, 2023 Special meetings, and September 12, 2023 Regular meeting
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to approve the benched minutes from the August 29, 2023, special meeting, the September 12, 19, and 26, 2023, special meetings, and September 12, 2023, regular meeting. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 23-63 – State of California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to adopt Resolution No. 23-63 entitled, “A Resolution Authorizing Submittal of Applications to CalRecycle for Grant Programs, Payment Programs and Related Authorization.” The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

PURCHASE OF TEN REPLACEMENT VEHICLES – Police Investigations A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to approve the purchase of ten replacement vehicles for Police Investigations to National Auto Fleet Group in the amount of $329,597.89.

The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

AWARD OF AN AGREEMENT – Pinnacle Petroleum
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to award a two-year and four-month agreement with the option to extend for two additional one-year periods for the provision and delivery of unleaded fuel on an as-need basis up to the amount of $650,000 per year to Pinnacle Petroleum; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 23-64 - California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Used Oil Payment Program (CalRecycle)
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to adopt Resolution No. 23-64 entitled, “A Resolution Accepting and Appropriating Grant Funding from the California Department of

City Council Minutes October 10, 2023
3 Resources Recycling and Recovery Used Oil Payment Program (CalRecycle) in the amount of $71,223 for the Oil Payment Program, Project No. 2327.” The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

APPROVAL OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT – PlanIT Geo, Inc.

A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to approve a Professional Services Agreement with PlanIT Geo, Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $249,024 (base agreement of $226,385 plus staff authority to spend up to a 10% contingency of $22,639) to conduct a Citywide Tree Inventory, Tree Maintenance Plan, and deploy Tree Management Software; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 23-65 - California Department of Resources (CalRecycle) Beverage Container Recycling City/County Payment Program
A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to adopt Resolution No. 23-65 entitled, “A Resolution Accepting Funding under the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Abatement City/County Payment Program and Allocating the Funds to Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Abatement Activities within the City of Concord.” The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

APPROVAL OF A BUDGET TRANSFER – Willow Pass Pedestrian Crossing (Project No. 2634) A motion was made by Birsan and seconded by Nakamura to approve a budget transfer in the amount of $45,000 to the Willow Pass Pedestrian Crossing (Project No. 2634), located on Salvio Street near Olivera Road, from Pothole and Base Repair #2, Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556) to Project 2634, and associated appropriation of such funds to Project 2634. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the Council.

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEM
RESIDENTIAL RENT STABILIZATION AND JUST CAUSE FOR EVICTION WORKSHOP – continued from September 5, 2023 and September 12, 2023
Housing Manager Sophia Huckaby reviewed the item and noted that this presentation’s focus was on questions received from the Council on September 12, including seeking additional direction from Council to get information for drafting the Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction Ordinances.

Housing Manager Huckabay introduced Mark Sawicki from RSG, who discussed capital improvement pass-throughs, petition costs, and retroactive rent adjustment pertaining to rent stabilization policy direction; substantial renovation for ‘No-Fault’ just cause and right of return after renovations completed pertaining to just cause eviction policy direction; residential rent registry fees pertaining to policy direction for both rent stabilization and just cause eviction; and explained that Council was being requested to provide policy direction on each of the topics.

Following questions and discussion by the City Council, the Council provided feedback to be incorporated into Ordinances for Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction as follows:
 No Capital Improvement Pass-Throughs
 No tenant fees related to tenant petitions; property owner petitions fees paid by property owners
 Retroactive Clause set to January 12, 2023; beginning September 2023 refund within 30 days
 Substantial Renovation for “No-Fault” Just Cause definition to match State Law (AB 1482 and SB 567)
 Right of Return after Renovations Completed
o Allow tenants the following two options:

City Council Minutes October 10, 2023
4  Select “no fault” relocation payment and give up right of return  Temporarily relocate and retain right of return
o Right to return to same base rent as when tenant vacated unit  Right of Return after Renovations Completed
o Relocation period is 30 days or more, relocate the tenant:
 To a hotel
 To a similar unit in the same complex or neighborhood; OR  To a mutually agreed upon alternate unit
 Residential Rent Registry Fees – No pass-throughs
 Provide clear definition of Fair Market Rate
 Update Relocation Assistance for No Fault Evictions
o Add option for three months’ rent or $8,500
o Add option for three months’ rent at fair market rate based on HUD FMR o Add option for three months’ rent at fair market rate plus $3,000 o Add option for four months’ rent for vulnerable population o Add option for vulnerable populations for four months’ rent and $3,000

CORRESPONDENCE
a. Agenda Item No. 3.a – District Update – PowerPoint Presentation b. Agenda Item No. 4.a – Benched August 29, 2023 Meeting Minutes c. Agenda Item No. 4.b – Resources Recycling and Recovery – Benched Correspondence d. Agenda Item No. 4.c – Purchase of Replacement Vehicles – Benched Correspondence e. Agenda Item No. 4.e – Recycling and Recovery Used Oil Payment Program – Benched Correspondence
f. Agenda Item No. 4.g – Beverage Container Recycling City/County Payment Program – Benched Correspondence
g. Agenda Item No. 5.a – Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction – Benched Correspondence
h. Agenda Item No. 5.a – Rent Stabilization and Just Cause for Eviction – PowerPoint Presentation

COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmembers shared information on events and activities in which they had participated since the last meeting and commented on items of interest.

ADJOURNMENT
By order of the Mayor, the meeting was adjourned on October 10, 2023, at 9:24 p.m.

LAURA M. HOFFMEISTER
MAYOR

JOELLE FOCKLER, MMC

CITY CLERK

Ord. No. 23-9 1
ORDINANCE NO. 23-9

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CONCORD MUNICIPAL CODE
TITLE 15 BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 15.75 (FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT)
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65800 et seq. provides for the amendment of any and all adopted City of Concord (“City”) zoning laws, ordinances, rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, the California Model Floodplain Ordinance is coordinated with CCR Title 24 and satisfies the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), developed by California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and approved by FEMA Region IX on April 6, 2020; and
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, FEMA Region IX performed a Community Assistance Visit (CAV) to review the City’s floodplain management program, including the Current Floodplain Management Ordinance for consistency with the California Model Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the amendments collectively are shown in the form of the proposed Chapter

15.75, Floodplain Management code section, attached hereto as Exhibit A (hereafter referred to as “Amendment”) and incorporated by reference; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after giving all public notices required by State Law and the Concord Municipal Code, held a duly noticed public hearing on October 3, 2023, on the proposed Amendment; and
WHEREAS, at such public hearing, the City Council considered all oral and written information, testimony, and comments received during the public review process, including the oral report from City staff, the written report from City staff dated October 3, 2023, materials, exhibits presented, the Concord Municipal Code, and all other information that constitutes the record of proceedings relating to the proposed Amendment, which are maintained at the offices of the City of Concord Clerk’s Office, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA (collectively, “Amendment Information”); and
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. All of the facts set forth in the Recitals are true and correct and are hereby

5.b

Ord. No. 23-9 2
incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

Section 2. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the Amendment Information, all other pertinent documents and testimony prior to acting upon Ordinance.

Section 3. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and may be obtained from the City of Concord Clerk’s Office at 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519.

Section 4. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15378, the approval of Ordinance language amending Floodplain Management is not an activity that constitutes a “project”, if this were determined to be a “project” for CEQA analysis, this activity falls within either the “Common Sense” CEQA exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) or is Categorically Exempt from the requirement for preparation of an environmental document as provided for in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 - 15304. No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis.

Section 5. The Amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City because the Amendment concerns codifying language to maintain compliance with the California Model Ordinance and the NFIP.

Section 6. Concord Municipal Code, Title 15, Building and Building Regulations, Chapter

15.75 (Floodplain Management) is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

Section 7. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase be declared invalid.

Section 8. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following passage and

Ord. No. 23-9 3
adoption. In the event a summary of said Ordinance is published in lieu of the entire Ordinance, a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five (5) days prior to its adoption and within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, including the vote of the Councilmembers. Additionally, a summary prepared by the City Attorney’s Office shall be published once at least five (5) days prior to the date of adoption of this Ordinance and once within fifteen (15) days after its passage and adoption, including the vote of the Councilmembers, in the East Bay Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Concord. ____________________________________
Laura M. Hoffmeister
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk

(Seal)
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//

Ord. No. 23-9 4
Ordinance No. 23-9 was duly and regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Concord held on October 3, 2023, and was thereafter duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on October 24, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers -
NOES: Councilmembers -
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers -
ABSENT: Councilmembers -
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an ordinance duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Concord, California.

Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
Attachments: Exhibit A – Amended Concord Municipal Code Chapter 15.75, Floodplain Management

Chapter 15.75

FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
Sections:

Article I. Statutory Authorization, Finding of Fact, Purpose and Methods

15.75.010 Statutory authorization.

15.75.020 Findings of fact.

15.75.030 Statement of purpose and intent.

15.75.040 Methods of reducing flood losses.

Article II. General Provisions

15.75.050 Definitions.

15.75.060 Lands to which this chapter applies.

15.75.070 Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard.

15.75.080 Compliance.

15.75.090 Abrogation and greater restrictions.

15.75.100 Interpretation.

15.75.110 Warning and disclaimer of liability.

15.75.120 Severability.

Article III. Administration

15.75.130 Designation of the Floodplain Administrator.

15.75.140 Duties and responsibilities of the Floodplain Administrator.

15.75.150 Development permit.

15.75.160 Appeals.

Article IV. Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction

15.75.170 Standards of construction.

15.75.180 Standards for utilities.

15.75.190 Standards for subdivisions and other proposed development.

15.75.200 Standards for manufactured homes.

15.75.210 Floodways.

Article V. Pine and Galindo Creek Floodway Regulations

15.75.220 Definitions.

15.75.230 Designation of floodway.

15.75.240 Structures subject to regulation.

Article VI. Violations; Penalties.

15.75.250 Unlawful to violate chapter.

Article VII. Variance Procedure
Exhibit A

15.75.260 Nature of variances.

15.75.270 Conditions for variances.

15.75.280 Denial of variance; appeal to City Council.

Article VIII. Other Measures

15.75.290 Hazard mitigation plan and evacuation plan.

Cross references: Buildings and building regulations, Title 15; health and sanitation, Title 8; manufactured homes, mobile homes, and trailers, Ch. 15.105; streets, sidewalks, and other public places, Title 12; subdivisions, Title 17; utilities, Title 13; zoning, Title 18.

Article I. Statutory Authorization, Finding of Fact, Purpose and Methods

15.75.010 Statutory authorization.

The Legislature of the State of California has in Government Code § 65302, 65560, and 65800 conferred upon local governments the authority to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizenry. Therefore, the City Council does hereby adopt the following floodplain management regulations.
(Code 2002, § 34-31. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.020 Findings of fact.
(a) The flood hazard areas of the city are subject to periodic inundation which could result in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare. (b) These flood losses could result from uses that are inadequately elevated, floodproofed, or protected from flood damage. The cumulative effect of obstructions in areas of special flood hazards which increase flood heights and velocities also contributes to flood losses. (Code 2002, § 34-32. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.030 Statement of purpose and intent.

It is the purpose of this chapter to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by legally enforceable regulations applied uniformly throughout the community to all publicly and privately owned land within flood prone areas. These regulations are designed to:
(a) Protect human life and health;
(b) Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; (c) Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the general public;

(d) Minimize prolonged business interruptions;
(e) Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains; electric, telephone and sewer lines; and streets and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard; (f) Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of special flood hazard so as to minimize future blighted areas caused by flood damage; (g) Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood hazard; and (h) Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for their actions.
(Code 2002, § 34-33. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.040 Methods of reducing flood losses.

In order to accomplish its purposes, this ordinance includes regulations to:
(a) Restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or velocities; (b) Require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; (c) Control the alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters;
(d) Control filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; and (e) Prevent or regulate the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas.
(Code 2002, § 34-34. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article II. General Provisions

15.75.050 Definitions.

Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this ordinance shall be interpreted so as to give them the meaning they have in common usage and to give this ordinance its most reasonable application.
“A zone” – See “Special flood hazard area”.
“Accessory structure” means a structure that is either:
(1) Solely for the parking of no more than 2 cars; or

(2) A small, low cost shed for limited storage, less than 150 square feet and $1,500 in value (labor and materials) at the time of adoption of the flood management ordinance. This amount shall be adjusted annually to account for inflation. This adjustment shall be based upon the most current Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index and other factors as determined by the Floodplain Administrator.
“Accessory use” means a use which is incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the parcel of land on which it is located.
“Appeal” means a request for a review of the Floodplain Administrator’s interpretation of any provision of this ordinance.
“Area of shallow flooding” means a designated AO or AH Zone on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The base flood depths range from one to three feet; a clearly defined channel does not exist; the path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterminate; and velocity flow may be evident. Such flooding is characterized by ponding or sheet flow.
“Area of special flood hazard” – See “Special flood hazard area.” “Base flood” means a flood which has a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (also called the “100 year flood”). Base flood is the term used throughout this ordinance. “Base flood elevation” (BFE) means the elevation shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Zones AE, AH, A1-30, VE and V1-V30 that indicates the water surface elevation resulting from a flood that has a 1-percent or greater chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. “Basement” means any area of the building having its floor subgrade – i.e., below ground level – On all sides.
“Building” – See “Structure”.
“Crawl space” – See subsection 15.75.170(c)(7).
“Development” means any man made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials. “Encroachment” means the advance or infringement of uses, plant growth, fill, excavation, buildings, permanent structures or development into a floodplain which may impede or alter the flow capacity of a floodplain.
“Existing manufactured home park or subdivision” means a manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed before July 5, 1984. “Expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision” means the preparation of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads).

“FEMA” means the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
“Flood, flooding, or flood water” means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from the overflow of inland or tidal waters; the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source. “Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM)” means initial flood hazard identification generally used for Emergency Program communities based on approximate data and identifies, in general, the SFHAs within a community.
“Flood Boundary and Floodway Map (FBFM)” means the official map on which FEMA or Federal Insurance Administration has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the floodway. “Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)” means the official map on which FEMA or Federal Insurance Administration has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the risk premium zones applicable to the community.
“Flood Insurance Study” means the official report provided by the Federal Emergency Management AgencyFederal Insurance Administration that includes flood profiles, the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, and the water surface elevation of the base flood. “Floodplain or flood prone area” means any land area susceptible to being inundated by water from any source – See “Flooding.”
“Floodplain Administrator” is the city official designated by title to administer and enforce the floodplain management regulations.
“Floodplain management” means the operation of an overall program of corrective and preventive measures for reducing flood damage and preserving and enhancing, where possible, natural resources in the floodplain, including but not limited to emergency preparedness plans, flood control works, floodplain management regulations, and open space plans. “Floodplain management regulations” means this ordinance and other zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, building codes, health regulations, special purpose ordinances (such as grading and erosion control) and other application of police power which control development in flood prone areas. This term describes federal, state or local regulations in any combination thereof which provide standards for preventing and reducing flood loss and damage. “Floodproofing” means any combination of structural and nonstructural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures, and their contents. For guidelines on dry and wet floodproofing, see FEMA Technical Bulletins TB 1-08, TB 3-93, and TB 7-93. “Floodway” means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that shall be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot. Also referred to as “Regulatory Floodway.” “Floodway fringe” is that area of the floodplain on either side of the “Regulatory Floodway” where encroachment may be permitted.

“Fraud and victimization” as related to Article VIII of this chapter, means that the variance granted shall not cause fraud on or victimization of the public. In examining this requirement, the city will consider the fact that every newly constructed building adds to government responsibilities and remains a part of the community for fifty to one hundred years. Buildings that are permitted to be constructed below the base flood elevation are subject during all those years to increased risk of damage from floods, while future owners of the property and the community as a whole are subject to all the costs, inconvenience, danger, and suffering that those increased flood damages bring. In addition, future owners may purchase the property, unaware that it is subject to potential flood damage, and can be insured only at very high flood insurance rates. “Governing body” is the local governing unit, i.e. county or municipality that is empowered to adopt and implement regulations to provide for the public health, safety and general welfare of its citizenry. “Hardship” as related to Article VIII of this chapter means the exceptional hardship that would result from a failure to grant the requested variance. The city requires that the variance be exceptional, unusual, and peculiar to the property involved. Mere economic or financial hardship alone is not exceptional. Inconvenience, aesthetic considerations, physical handicaps, personal preferences, or the disapproval of one’s neighbors likewise cannot, as a rule, qualify as an exceptional hardship. All of these problems can be resolved through other means without granting a variance, even if the alternative is more expensive, or requires the property owner to build elsewhere or put the parcel to a different use than originally intended.
“Highest adjacent grade” means the highest natural elevation of the ground surface prior to construction next to the proposed walls of a structure. “Historic structure” means any structure that is:
(1) Listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places (a listing maintained by the Department of Interior) or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as meeting the requirements for individual listing on the National Register; (2) Certified or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as contributing to the historical significance of a registered historic district or a district preliminarily determined by the Secretary to qualify as a registered historic district; (3) Individually listed on a state inventory of historic places in states with historic preservation programs which have been approved by the Secretary of Interior; or (4) Individually listed on a local inventory of historic places in communities with historic preservation programs that have been certified either by an approved state program as determined by the Secretary of the Interior or directly by the Secretary of the Interior in states without approved programs.
“July 5, 1984” – The date of the initial Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and the city’s entry into the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
“Levee” means a man made structure, usually an earthen embankment, designed and constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control or divert the flow of water so as to provide protection from temporary flooding.

“Levee system” means a flood protection system which consists of a levee, or levees, and associated structures, such as closure and drainage devices, which are constructed and operated in accord with sound engineering practices.
“Lowest floor” means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area, including basement (see “Basement” definition). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure below the lowest floor that is usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building’s lowest floor provided it conforms to applicable non-elevation design requirements, including, but not limited to:
(1) The flood openings standard in subsection 15.75.170(c)(4); (2) The anchoring standards in subsection 15.75.170(a); (3) The construction materials and methods standards in subsection 15.75.170(b); and (4) The standards for utilities in section 15.75.180.
“Manufactured home” means a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities. For the purposes of floodplain management, the term also includes mobile homes and recreational vehicles, park trailers, travel trailers and similar transportable structures that are placed on a site for 180 consecutive days or longerThe term “manufactured home” does not include a “recreational vehicle”.
“Manufactured home park or subdivision” means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land divided into two or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale.
“Market value” is determined using the city’s most recently issued “Existing Residential Structures in Special Flood Hazard Areas Value Determination Fact Sheet” form and applicable “Structure Value Determination Work Sheet” as amended from time to time. The referenced forms determine the market value by estimating the cost to replace the structure in new condition and adjusting that cost figure by the amount of depreciation which has accrued since the structure was constructed. (1) The cost of replacement of the structure shall be based on a square foot cost factor determined by reference to a building cost estimating guide recognized by the building construction industry.
(2) The amount of depreciation shall be determined by taking into account the age and physical deterioration of the structure and functional obsolescence as approved by the floodplain administrator, but shall not include economic or other forms of external obsolescence.

Use of replacement costs or accrued depreciation factors different from those contained in recognized building cost estimating guides may be considered only if such factors are included in a report prepared by an independent professional appraiser and supported by a written explanation of the differences.
“Mean sea level” means, for purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program, the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929, North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) of 1988, or other

datum, to which base flood elevations shown on a community’s Flood Insurance Rate Map are referenced.
“New construction”, for floodplain management purposes, means structures for which the “start of construction” commenced on or after July 5, 1984, and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures.
“New manufactured home park or subdivision” means a manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed on or after July 5, 1984. “Obstruction” includes, but is not limited to, any dam, wall, wharf, embankment, levee, dike, pile, abutment, protection, excavation, channelization, bridge, conduit, culvert, building, wire, fence, rock, gravel, refuse, fill, structure, vegetation or other material in, along, across or projecting into any watercourse which may alter, impede, retard or change the direction and/or velocity of the flow of water, or due to its location, its propensity to snare or collect debris carried by the flow of water, or its likelihood of being carried downstream.
“One hundred year flood” or “100 year flood” – See “Base flood.” “Program deficiency” means a defect in a community’s floodplain management regulations or administrative procedures that impairs effective implementation of those floodplain management regulations.
“Public safety and nuisance” as related to Article VIII of this chapter, means that the granting of a variance shall not result in anything which is injurious to safety or health of an entire community or neighborhood, or any considerable number of persons, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin. “Recreational vehicle” means (a) a vehicle that is built on a single chassis, 400 square feet (37.16 m2) or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection, designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light-duty truck, and designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use, or (b) as otherwise defined by Health and Safety Code section 18010 as amended from time to time. A recreational vehicle is ready for highway use when it is on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices and has no permanently attached additions.
“Regulatory floodway” means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that shall be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot.
“Remedy a violation” means to bring the structure or other development into compliance with applicable Federal or State floodplain management regulations or this ordinance, or if this is not possible, to reduce the impacts of its noncompliance. Ways that impacts may be reduced include protecting the structure or other affected development from flood damages, implementing the enforcement provisions of the ordinance or otherwise deterring future similar violations, or reducing local, State or Federal financial exposure with regard to the structure or other development.

“Riverine” means relating to, formed by, or resembling a river (including tributaries), stream, brook, etc.
“Sheet flow area” – See “Area of shallow flooding.”
“Special flood hazard area (SFHA)” means an area in the floodplain subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. It is shown on an FHBM or FIRM as Zone A, AO, A1 A30, AE, A99, or, AH.
“Start of construction” includes substantial improvement and other proposed new development and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement, or other improvement was within 180 days from the date of the permit. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufacture home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading, and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. “Structure” means a walled and roofed building that is principally above ground; this includes a gas or liquid storage tank or a manufactured home.
“Substantial damage” means:
(1) Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred; or
(2) Flood-related damages sustained by a structure on two separate occasions during a 10- year period for which the cost of repairs at the time of each such event, on the average, equals or exceeds 25 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. This is also known as “repetitive loss.”
“Substantial improvement” means any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the “start of construction” of the improvement. This term includes structures which have incurred “substantial damage”, regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does not, however, include either:
(1) Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations or state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions; or (2) Any alteration of a “historic structure,” provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure’s continued designation as a “historic structure.”

“Variance” means a grant of relief from the requirements of this ordinance which permits construction in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by this ordinance. “Violation” means the failure of a structure or other development to be fully compliant with this ordinance. A structure or other development without the elevation certificate, other certifications, or other evidence of compliance required in this ordinance is presumed to be in violation until such time as that documentation is provided.
“Water surface elevation” means the height, in relation to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929, North American Vertical Datum (NAVD) of 1988, or other datum, of floods of various magnitudes and frequencies in the floodplains of coastal or riverine areas. “Watercourse” means a lake, river, creek, stream, wash, arroyo, channel or other topographic feature on or over which waters flow at least periodically. Watercourse includes specifically designated areas in which substantial flood damage may occur. (Code 2002, § 34-51. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.060 Lands to which this chapter applies.

This chapter shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the city. (Code 2002, § 34-52. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.070 Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard.

Purpose and intent. The Federal National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 allows persons in floodplain areas of a community to purchase flood insurance at reduced rates. In order for such rates to be available within a community, the community shall make provision for regulating development and land uses in accordance with applicable federal requirements. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to identify special hazard areas in the city which are prone to flooding and to impose requirements on development and uses within such areas in accordance with applicable federal requirements.

The areas of special flood hazard identified by FEMA in the “Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Report for City of Concord” as dated March 21, 2017 June 16, 2009, with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM’s) dated according to the effective dates listed in the City of Concord Firm Index Table below and and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps (FBFM’s), dated June 16, 2009, and all subsequent amendments and/or revisions, including Letters of Map Amendments (LOMA’s) and Letters of Map Revisions (LOMR’s) are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this ordinance. This FIS and attendant mapping is the minimum area of applicability of this ordinance and may be supplemented by studies for other areas which allow implementation of this ordinance and which are recommended to the City Council by the Floodplain Administrator. The study, FIRM’s, FBFM’s, LOMA’s and LOMR’s are on file in the office of the City Clerk.

Firm Index Table
Firm Panel Effective Date
06013CIND0C 03/21/2017
06013C0093H 03/21/2017

06013C0094H 03/21/2017
06013C0277F 06/16/2009
06013C0279F 06/16/2009
06013C0281F 06/16/2009
06013C0282F 06/16/2009
06013C0283F 06/16/2009
06013C0284F 06/16/2009
06013C0291F 06/16/2009
06013C0292F 06/16/2009
06013C0301G 03/21/2017
06013C0302G 03/21/2017
06013C0303G 03/21/2017
06013C0304G 03/21/2017
06013C0308F 06/16/2009
06013C0312F 06/16/2009
06013C0315F 06/16/2009
(Code 2002, § 34-53. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.080 Compliance.

No structure or land shall hereafter be constructed, located, extended, converted, or altered without full compliance with the terms of this ordinance and other applicable regulations. Violation of the requirements (including violations of conditions and safeguards) shall constitute a misdemeanor.

Nothing herein shall prevent the city from taking such lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
(Code 2002, § 34-54. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.090 Abrogation and greater restrictions.

This chapter is not intended to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this ordinance and another ordinance, easement, covenant, or deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall prevail. (Code 2002, § 34-55. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.100 Interpretation.

In the interpretation and application of this ordinance, all provisions shall be:
(a) Considered as minimum requirements;
(b) Liberally construed in favor of the city; and
(c) Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any other powers granted under state statutes. (Code 2002, § 34-56. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.110 Warning and disclaimer of liability.

The degree of flood protection required by this ordinance is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man made or natural causes. This ordinance does not imply that land outside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages. This ordinance shall not create liability on the part of the city, any officer or employee thereof, the State of California, or FEMA, for any flood damages that result from reliance on this ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. (Code 2002, § 34-57. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.120 Severability.

This chapter and the various parts thereof are hereby declared to be severable. Should any section of this ordinance be declared by the courts to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole, or any portion thereof other than the section so declared to be unconstitutional or invalid.
(Code 2002, § 34-58. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article III. Administration

15.75.130 Designation of the Floodplain Administrator.

The City Engineer is hereby appointed to administer, implement, and enforce this ordinance by granting or denying development permits in accord with its provisions. (Code 2002, § 34-71. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.140 Duties and responsibilities of the Floodplain Administrator.

The duties and responsibilities of the Floodplain Administrator shall include, but not be limited to the following:
(a) Permit Review. Review all development permits to determine whether:
(1) Permit requirements of this ordinance have been satisfied, including determination of substantial improvement and substantial damage of existing structures; (2) All other required state and federal permits have been obtained; (3) The site is reasonably safe from flooding;
(4) The proposed development does not adversely affect the carrying capacity of areas where base flood elevations have been determined but a floodway has not been designated. This means that the cumulative effect of the proposed development when combined with all other

existing and anticipated development will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than 1 foot at any point within the city;
(5) All Letters of Map Revision (LOMR’s) for flood control projects are approved prior to the issuance of building permits. Building Permits shall not be issued based on Conditional Letters of Map Revision (CLOMR’s). Approved CLOMR’s allow construction of the proposed flood control project and land preparation as specified in the “start of construction” definition; and (6) The proposed development complies with Title 16 of this code, Stormwater Management, regarding the threshold for which the flood discharge exiting the development after construction is equal to, or less than, the flood discharge at the location prior to development, based upon the requirements set forth in the city’s NPDES permit. (b) Substantial improvement and substantial damage determinations.

For applications for building permits to improve buildings and structures, including alterations, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, additions, rehabilitations, renovations, substantial improvements, repairs of substantial damage, and any other improvement of or work on such buildings and structures, the Floodplain Administrator, in coordination with the Building Official, shall:
(1) Estimate the market value, or require the applicant to obtain an appraisal of the market value prepared by a qualified independent appraiser, of the building or structure before the start of construction of the proposed work; in the case of repair, the market value of the building or structure shall be the market value before the damage occurred and before any repairs are made.
(2) Compare the cost to perform the improvement, the cost to repair the damaged building to its pre-damaged condition, or the combined costs of improvements and repairs, when applicable, to the market value of the building or structure. (3) Determine and document whether the proposed work constitutes substantial improvement or repair of substantial damage.
(4) Notify the applicant when it is determined that the work constitutes substantial improvement or repair of substantial damage and that compliance with the flood resistant construction requirements of the building code is required and notify the applicant when it is determined that work does not constitute substantial improvement or repair of substantial damage.Development of Substantial Improvement and Substantial Damage Procedures. (1) Use FEMA publication FEMA 213, “Answers to Questions About Substantially Damaged Buildings,” develop detailed procedures for identifying and administering requirements for substantial improvement and substantial damage, to include defining “Market Value.” (2) Assure procedures are coordinated with other departments/divisions and implemented by community staff.
(c) Review, Use and Development of Other Base Flood Data.

(1) Use of elevation data. When base flood elevation data is not provided in the flood insurance study or the FIRM, the city shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize the best flood base data available from a Federal or State Agency or any other source, or private engineering reports, in order to administer the terms of this chapter and to provide estimated base flood elevations.
(d) Notification of other agencies.
(1) Alteration or relocation of a watercourse.
a. Notify adjacent communities and any other applicable local, State and Federal Agencies and the California Department of Water Resources prior to alteration or relocation;
b. Submit evidence of such notification to FEMA; and
c. Assure that the flood carrying capacity within the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse is maintained.
(2) Base Flood Elevation changes due to physical alterations. a. Within 6 months of information becoming available or project completion, whichever comes first, the floodplain administrator shall submit or assure that the permit applicant submits technical or scientific data to FEMA for a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR). b. Require applicants who submit hydrologic and hydraulic engineering analyses to support permit applications to submit to FEMA the data and information necessary to maintain the Flood Insurance Rate Maps when the analyses indicate changes in base flood elevations, flood hazard area boundaries, or floodway designations; such submissions shall be made within 6 months of such data becoming availableAll LOMR’s for flood control projects are approved prior to the issuance of building permits. Building Permits shall not be issued based on Conditional Letters of Map Revision (CLOMR’s).

Approved CLOMR’s allow construction of the proposed flood control project and land preparation as specified in the “start of construction” definition. c. Submission of additional data. When additional hydrologic, hydraulic or other engineering data, studies, and additional analyses are submitted to support an application, the applicant has the right to seek a Letter of Map Change from FEMA to change the base flood elevations, change floodway boundaries, or change boundaries of flood hazard areas shown on FIRMs, and to submit such data to FEMA for such purposes. The analyses shall be prepared by a qualified CA Licensed Civil Engineer in a format required by FEMA. Submittal requirements and processing fees shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Provided FEMA issues a Conditional Letter of Map Revision, construction of proposed flood control projects and land preparation for development are permitted, including clearing, excavation, grading, and filling. Permits for construction of buildings shall not be issued until the applicant satisfies the FEMA requirements for issuance of a Letter of Map Revision.

Such submissions are necessary so that upon confirmation of those physical changes affecting flooding conditions, risk premium rates and floodplain management requirements are based on current data.

(3) Changes in corporate boundaries. Notify FEMA in writing whenever the corporate boundaries have been modified by annexation or other means and include a copy of a map of the community clearly delineating the new corporate limits. (e) Documentation of Floodplain Development. Obtain and maintain for public inspection and make available as needed the following:
(1) Certification required by subsection 15.75.170(c)(1) and section 15.75.200 (lowest floor elevations);
(2) Certification required by subsection 15.75.170(c)(2) (elevation or floodproofing of nonresidential structures);
(3) Certification required by subsection 15.75.170(c)(3) (wet floodproofing standard); (4) Certification of elevation required by subsection 15.75.190(a)(3) (subdivisions and other proposed development standards);
(5) Certification required by subsection 15.75.210(b) (floodway encroachments); and (6) Maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and report such variances issued in its biennial report submitted to FEMA. (7) Inspections
a. Inspections, in general. Development for which a permit for floodplain development is required shall be subject to inspection. Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of these regulations or the building code. Inspections presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of these regulations or the building code or other ordinances shall not be valid. b. Inspections of development other than buildings and structures. The Floodplain Administrator shall make or cause to be made, inspections of all development other than buildings and structures that is authorized by issuance of a permit for floodplain development under these regulations. The Floodplain Administrator shall inspect flood hazard areas from time to time to determine when development is undertaken without issuance of a permit.
c. Inspections of manufactured homes installations. The Floodplain Administrator shall make or cause to be made, inspections of installation and replacement of manufactured homes in flood hazard areas authorized by issuance of a permit for floodplain development under these regulations. Upon installation of a manufactured home and receipt of the elevation certification required in Section 15.75.200(e) of these regulations the Floodplain Administrator shall inspect the installation or have the installation inspected.
d. Buildings and structures. The Building Official shall make or cause to be made, inspections for buildings and structures in flood hazard areas authorized by permit, in accordance with the building code:

1. Lowest floor elevation. Upon placement of the lowest floor, including the basement, and prior to further vertical construction, certification of the elevation required in the building code shall be prepared by a CA Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer and submitted to the building official.

2. Final inspection. Prior to the final inspection, certification of the elevation required in the building code shall be prepared by a CA Licensed Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer and submitted to the building official.
(f) Map Determination. Make interpretations where needed, as to the exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazard, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions. The person contesting the location of the boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to appeal the interpretation as provided in section 15.75.160. (g) Remedial Action. Take action to remedy violations of this chapter as specified in section 15.75.080.
(h) Biennial Report. Complete and submit Biennial Report to FEMA. (i) Planning. Assure community’s General Plan is consistent with floodplain management objectives herein.
(j) Non-conversion of Enclosed Area Below the Lowest Floor. To ensure that the areas below the BFE shall be used solely for parking vehicles, limited storage, or access to the building and not be finished for use as human habitation without first becoming fully compliant with the floodplain management ordinance in effect at the time of conversion, the Floodplain Administrator shall:
(1) Determine which applicants for new construction and/or substantial improvements have fully enclosed areas 5 feet or more below the lowest floor; (2) Enter into a “Declaration of Land Restriction” or equivalent with the city. The agreement shall be signed by the applicant at the issuance of the Building Permit. The agreement shall be recorded with the Contra Costa County Recorder as a deed restriction prior to the project receiving its final inspection. The non-conversion agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the Floodplain Administrator; and
(3) Have the authority to inspect any area of a structure below the base flood elevation to ensure compliance upon prior notice of at least 72 hours. (Code 2002, § 34-72. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.150 Development permit.

A development permit shall be obtained before any construction or other development, including manufactured homes, within any area of special flood hazard established in section 15.75.070.

Application for a development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the city. The applicant shall provide the following minimum information:
(a) Plans in duplicate, drawn to scale, showing:

(1) Location, dimensions, and elevation of the area in question, existing or proposed structures, storage of materials and equipment and their location; (2) Proposed locations of water supply, sanitary sewer, and other utilities; (3) Grading information showing existing and proposed contours, any proposed fill, and drainage facilities;
(4) Location of the regulatory floodway when applicable; (5) Base flood elevation information as specified in section 15.75.070 or subsection 15.75.140(c);
(6) Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures; in flood hazard zone AO, elevation of existing grade and proposed elevation of lowest floor of all structures; and
(7) Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any nonresidential structure will be floodproofed, as required in subsection 15.75.170(c)(2) of this ordinance and detailed in FEMA Technical Bulletin TB 3-93.
(b) Certification from a registered civil engineer or architect that the nonresidential floodproofed building meets the floodproofing criteria in subsection 15.75.170(c)(2). (c) For a crawl-space foundation, location and total net area of foundation openings as required in subsection 15.75.170(c)(4) of this ordinance and detailed in FEMA Technical Bulletins TB 1-08 and TB 7-93.
(d) Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development.
(e) All appropriate certifications listed in subsection 15.75.140(e) of this ordinance. (f) Such other information as the city may require.
(Code 2002, § 34-73. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.160 Appeals.

The City Council shall hear and decide appeals when it is alleged there is an error in any requirement, decision, or determination made by the Floodplain Administrator in the enforcement or administration of this ordinance. Appeals shall be filed in accordance with Section 2.05.040. (Code 2002, § 34-74. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article IV. Provisions for Flood Hazard Reduction

15.75.170 Standards of construction.

In all areas of special flood hazards the following standards are required:
(a) Anchoring. All new construction and substantial improvements of structures, including manufactured homes, shall be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy.
(b) Construction Materials and Methods. All new construction and substantial improvements of structures, including manufactured homes, shall be constructed:
(1) With flood resistant materials, and utility equipment resistant to flood damage for areas below the base flood elevation;
(2) Using methods and practices that minimize flood damage; (3) With electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities elevated to a height 1-foot or greater above, or above, the BFE or depth number specified on the FIRM; and
(4) Within Zones AH or AO, so that there are adequate drainage paths around structures on slopes to guide flood waters around and away from proposed structures. (c) Elevation and Floodproofing.
(1) Residential construction. All new construction or substantial improvements of residential structures shall have the lowest floor, including basement:
a. In AE, AH, A1-30 Zones, elevated to 1 foot or more above the base flood elevation. b. In an AO zone, elevated above the highest adjacent grade to a height equal to or exceeding 1 foot above the depth number specified in feet on the FIRM, or elevated at least 2 feet above the highest adjacent grade if no depth number is specified. c. In an A zone, without BFE’s specified on the FIRM [unnumbered A zone], where the BFE’s have been determined pursuant to subsection 15.75.140(c), elevated as required in subsection 15.75.170(c)(1)a.
d. In an A zone, without BFE’s specified on the FIRM [unnumbered A zone], where the BFE’s have not otherwise been determined, the following requirements shall apply:

1. Single parcels – Elevate the lowest floor of any residential structure to no less than two feet above natural grade when base flood elevation is not established.

2. Multiple parcels (five or more) – All proposals shall establish the 100-year base flood elevation before the first consideration of any plan or permit for construction or development of the parcels. The city may require standards for subdivisions in excess of those identified elsewhere in this chapter.

Upon the completion of the forms for the structure’s foundation, and prior to pouring the foundation, the elevation of the lowest flood, including basement, shall be certified by a registered civil engineer

or licensed land surveyor, and verified by the building division to be properly elevated. Such certification and verification shall be provided to the Floodplain Administrator.

Upon the completion of the structure, the elevation of the lowest floor, including basement, shall be certified by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, and verified by the building division to be properly elevated. Such certification and verification shall be provided to the Floodplain Administrator.
(2) Nonresidential construction. All new construction or substantial improvements of nonresidential structures shall either be elevated to conform with subsection 15.75.170(c)(1) or:
a. Be floodproofed, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, below the elevation recommended under subsection 15.75.170(c)(1), so that the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; b. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and
c. Be certified by a registered civil engineer or architect that the standards of subsections

15.75.170(c)(2)a and 15.75.170(c)(2)b are satisfied. Such certification shall be provided to the Floodplain Administrator.
(3) Floodproofing. Nonresidential construction shall either be elevated in conformance with subsections 15.75.170(c)(1) or 15.75.170(c)(2) or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, be floodproofed to 1 foot above the base flood elevation. Examples of floodproofing include, but are not limited to:
a. Installation of watertight doors, bulkheads, and shutters; b. Reinforcement of walls to resist water pressure;
c. Use of paints, membranes, or mortars to reduce seepage through walls; d. Addition of mass or weight to structure to resist flotation; e. Armor protection of all fill materials from scour and/or erosion; f. Certification provided to the city by a registered professional engineer or architect that the standards of this subsection are satisfied.
g. For all new construction and substantial improvements, fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters.

Designs for meeting this requirement shall either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or shall meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be equipped with screens,

louvers, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters.
(4) Flood openings. All new construction and substantial improvements of structures with fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor (excluding basements) that are usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, and which are subject to flooding, shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwater. Designs for meeting this requirement shall meet the following minimum criteria:
a. For non-engineered openings:

1. Have a minimum of two openings on different sides having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding;

2. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade;

3. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwater; and

4. Buildings with more than one enclosed area shall have openings on exterior walls for each area to allow flood water to directly enter; or b. Be certified by a registered civil engineer or architect. (5) Manufactured homes. See section 15.75.200.
(6) Garages and low cost accessory structures.
a. Attached garages.

1. A garage attached to a residential structure, constructed with the garage floor slab below the BFE, shall be designed to allow for the automatic entry of flood waters. See subsection 15.75.170(c)(4). Areas of the garage below the BFE shall be constructed with flood resistant materials. See subsection 15.75.170(b).

2. A garage attached to a nonresidential structure shall meet the above requirements or be dry floodproofed. For guidance on below grade parking areas, see FEMA Technical Bulletin TB 5.25.0306.
b. Detached garages and accessory structures.

1. “Accessory structures” used solely for parking (2 car detached garages or smaller) or limited storage (small, low-cost sheds), as defined in Article II of this chapter, may be constructed such that its floor is below the base flood elevation (BFE), provided the structure is designed and constructed in accordance with the following requirements:
i. Use of the accessory structure shall be limited to parking or limited storage;

ii. The portions of the accessory structure located below the BFE shall be built using flood-resistant materials;
iii. The accessory structure shall be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse and lateral movement;
iv. Any mechanical and utility equipment in the accessory structure shall be elevated or floodproofed to or1 foot or higher above the BFE;
v. The accessory structure shall comply with floodplain encroachment provisions in section 15.75.210; and
vi. The accessory structure shall be designed to allow for the automatic entry of flood waters in accordance with subsection 15.75.170(c)(4).

2. Detached garages and accessory structures not meeting the above standards shall be constructed in accordance with all applicable standards in section 15.75.170.
(7) Crawl Space Construction. This subsection applies to buildings with crawl spaces up to 2 feet below grade. Below-grade crawl space construction in accordance with the requirements listed below will not be considered basements.
a. The building shall be designed and adequately anchored to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement of the structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy. Crawl space construction is not allowed in areas with flood velocities greater than 5 feet per second unless the design is reviewed by a qualified design professional, such as a registered civil engineer; b. The crawl space is an enclosed area below the BFE and, as such, shall have openings that equalize hydrostatic pressures by allowing for the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters. For guidance on flood openings, see FEMA Technical Bulletin TB 1-08; c. Portions of the building below the BFE shall be constructed with materials resistant to flood damage. This includes not only the foundation walls of the crawl space used to elevate the building, but also any joists, insulation, or other materials that extend below the BFE; and
d. Any building utility systems within the crawl space shall be elevated above BFE or designed so that floodwaters cannot enter or accumulate within the system components during flood conditions.
e. Requirements for all below-grade crawl space construction, in addition to the above requirements, to include the following:

1. The interior grade of a crawl space below the BFE shall not be more than 2 feet below the lowest adjacent exterior grade (LAG), shown as D in figure 3 of Technical Bulletin TB 11-01;

2. The height of the below-grade crawl space, measured from the interior grade of the crawl space to the top of the crawl space foundation wall shall not exceed 4 feet (shown as L in figure 3 of Technical Bulletin TB 11-01) at any point;

3. There shall be an adequate drainage system that removes floodwaters from the interior area of the crawl space within a reasonable period of time after a flood event, not to exceed 72 hours; and

4. The velocity of floodwaters at the site should not exceed 5 feet per second for any crawl space. For velocities in excess of 5 feet per second, other foundation types shall be used.
(8) Standards for storage of materials and equipment.
a. The storage or processing of materials that are in time of flooding, buoyant, flammable, explosive, or could be injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. b. Storage of other material or equipment may be allowed if not subject to major damage by floods and firmly anchored to prevent flotation or if readily removable from the area within the time available after flood warning.
(9) Recreational Vehicles.
a. Temporary placement. Recreational vehicles in flood hazard areas, shall be placed on a site for less than 180 consecutive days or shall be fully licensed and ready for highway use. Ready for highway use means the recreational vehicle is on wheels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and has no permanently attached additions, such as rooms, stairs, decks and porches. b. Permanent placement. Recreational vehicles that do not meet the limitations in subsection 15.75.170(c)(9)a. for temporary placement shall meet the requirements of

15.75.200 for manufactured homes.
(Code 2002, § 34-91. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.180 Standards for utilities.
(a) All new and replacement water supply and sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate:
(1) Infiltration of flood waters into the systems; and
(2) Discharge from the systems into flood waters.
(b) On site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them, or contamination from them during flooding.

(Code 2002, § 34-92. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.190 Standards for subdivisions and other proposed development.
(a) All subdivision proposals and other proposed development, including proposals for manufactured home parks and subdivisions, shall:
(1) Identify the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) and Base Flood Elevations (BFE). (2) Identify the elevations of lowest floors of all proposed structures and pads on the final plans.
(3) If the site is filled above the base flood elevation, the following as-built information for each structure shall be certified by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor and provided as part of an application for a Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (LOMR-F) to the Floodplain Administrator:
a. Lowest floor elevation.
b. Pad elevation.
c. Lowest adjacent grade.
(b) All subdivision proposals and other proposed development shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage.
(c) All subdivision proposals and other proposed development shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage. (d) All subdivisions and other proposed development shall provide adequate drainage to reduce exposure to flood hazards.
(Code 2002, § 34-93. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.200 Standards for manufactured homes.

All manufactured homes that are placed or substantially improved, on sites located: (1) outside of a manufactured home park or subdivision; (2) in a new manufactured home park or subdivision; (3) in an expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision; or (4) in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision shall:
(a) Within Zones A, AO, A1 30, AH, and AE on the community’s Flood Insurance Rate Map, be elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor and machinery and utilities servicing the of the manufactured home is elevated to 1 foot or more above the base flood elevation and be securely fastened to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement in accordance with one of the following methods:

(1) By providing an anchoring system designed to withstand horizontal forces of 15 pounds per square foot and uplift forces of nine pounds per square foot; or (2) By the anchoring of the unit’s system designed to be in compliance to the Department of Housing and Urban Development Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards; or (3) By bolting the frame or undercarriage to a reinforced, permanent foundation such as a retaining wall or storm wall used to set the unit.

As set forth in section 15.75.160, certification meeting the standards above is required of the installer or state agency responsible for regulating the placement, installation, and anchoring of individual manufactured home units.
(b) Provide adequate surface drainage and access for a hauler; (c) Place all manufactured homes on pads or lots elevated on compacted fill or on pilings so that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated to 1 foot or more above the base flood elevation.

If elevated on pilings:
(1) The lots shall be large enough to permit steps;
(2) The pilings shall be placed in stable soil no more than ten feet apart; and (3) Reinforcement shall be provided for pilings more than six feet above ground level. (d) No new manufactured home shall be placed or substantially improved in a floodway. (e) Certification of compliance is required of the developer responsible for the plan or state agency responsible for regulating manufactured home placement.

Upon the completion of the structure, the elevation of the lowest floor including basement shall be certified by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, and verified by the building inspector to be properly elevated. Such certification and verification shall be provided to the Floodplain Administrator.
(Code 2002, § 34-94. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.210 Floodways.

Since floodways are an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply:
(a) Until a regulatory floodway is adopted, no new construction, substantial development, or other development (including fill) shall be permitted within Zones A1-30 and AE, unless it is demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development, when combined with all other development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than 1 foot at any point within the city; or establish a setback from the stream bank equal to five times the width of the stream at the top of the bank or 20 feet on each side from the top of the bank, whichever is greater.

(b) Within an adopted regulatory floodway, the city shall prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development, unless certification by a registered civil engineer is provided demonstrating that the proposed encroachment shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge. (c) If subsections 15.75.210(a) and 15.75.210(b) are satisfied, all new construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development shall comply with all other applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of this Article IV.
(Code 2002, § 34-95. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article V. Pine and Galindo Creek Floodway Regulations

15.75.220 Definitions.

The definitions set forth in the Colby-Alquist Flood Plain Management Act, Water Code §§ 8400-- 8415, are incorporated in this section as if specifically set forth herein. (Code 2002, § 34-121. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.230 Designation of floodway.

The definitions set forth in the Colby-Alquist Flood Plain Management Act, Water Code §§ 8400-- 8415, are incorporated in this section as if specifically set forth herein. (Code 2002, § 34-122. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.240 Structures subject to regulation.
(a) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any structure which is located within the designated floodway on the effective date of Ordinance No. 1181, September 8, 1980. However, an existing structure shall be deemed to be a nonconforming structure and shall conform to the provisions of this section if the structure is not used for a continuous six-month period or the structure is damaged or destroyed to the extent of more than 50 percent of its reasonable value. (b) The construction of structures in the designated floodway which may endanger life or significantly restrict the carrying capacity of the designated floodway shall be prohibited. (c) No structures shall be constructed within the areas of any temporary construction right-of-way established within the designated floodway. However, upon the completion of acceptance of floodway improvements, structures may be allowed in the area of the temporary construction rightof-way, provided there is no conflict with the provisions of this section and the Colby-Alquist Flood Plain Management Act.
(d) As used herein, “structures” does not include public utility electric, gas, or communication lines which may be located within the designated floodway.
(Code 2002, § 34-123. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article VI. Violations; Penalties.

15.75.250 Unlawful to violate chapter.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to construct, locate, extend, convert, or alter any structure or land without full compliance with the terms of this chapter and all other applicable regulations.
(b) Any person, firm, or corporation violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of an infraction and, upon conviction of any such violation, shall be punishable in accordance with section 1.05.220 of the Concord Municipal Code.
(Code 2002, § 34-141. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article VII. Variance Procedure

15.75.260 Nature of variances.

The issuance of a variance is for floodplain management purposes only. Insurance premium rates are determined by statute according to actuarial risk and will not be modified by the granting of a variance.

The variance criteria set forth in this section of the ordinance are based on the general principle of zoning law that variances pertain to a piece of property and are not personal in nature. A variance may be granted for a parcel of property with physical characteristics so unusual that complying with the requirements of this ordinance would create an exceptional hardship to the applicant or the surrounding property owners. The characteristics shall be unique to the property and not be shared by adjacent parcels. The unique characteristic shall pertain to the land itself, not to the structure, its inhabitants, or the property owners.

It is the duty of the city to help protect its citizens from flooding. This need is so compelling and the implications of the cost of insuring a structure built below flood level are so serious that variances from the flood elevation or from other requirements in the flood ordinance are quite rare. The long term goal of preventing and reducing flood loss and damage can only be met if variances are strictly limited. Therefore, the variance guidelines provided in this ordinance are more detailed and contain multiple provisions that shall be met before a variance can be properly granted. The criteria are designed to screen out those situations in which alternatives other than a variance are more appropriate.
(Code 2002, § 34-151. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.270 Conditions for variances.
(a) Generally, variances may be issued for new construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development to be erected on a lot of one half acre or less in size contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level, providing that the procedures of Articles IV and V of this chapter have been fully considered. As the lot size increases beyond one half acre, the technical justification required for issuing the variance increases. (ba) Variances may be issued for the repair or rehabilitation of “historic structures” (as defined in section 15.75.050 of this chapter) upon a determination that the proposed repair or rehabilitation will

not preclude the structure’s continued designation as a historic structure and the variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the structure. (cb) Variances shall not be issued within any mapped regulatory floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result.
(dc) Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the “minimum necessary” considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. “Minimum necessary” means to afford relief with a minimum of deviation from the requirements of this ordinance. For example, in the case of variances to an elevation requirement, this means the Floodplain Administrator need not grant permission for the applicant to build at grade, or even to whatever elevation the applicant proposes, but only to that elevation which the city believes will both provide relief and preserve the integrity of the local ordinance.
(ed) Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice over the signature of a community official that:
(1) The issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the base flood level will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance up to amounts as high as $25 for $100 of insurance coverage, and
(2) Such construction below the base flood level increases risks to life and property. It is recommended that a copy of the notice shall be recorded by the Floodplain Administrator in the Office of the Contra Costa County Recorder and shall be recorded in a manner so that it appears in the chain of title of the affected parcel of land. (fe) The Floodplain Administrator will maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and report such variances issued in its biennial report submitted to FEMA. (Code 2002, § 34-152. Ord. No. 10-1)

15.75.280 Denial of variance; appeal to City Council.

Denials of variances may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to section 2.05.050. (a) In hearing appeals for variances, the City Council shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other sections of this ordinance, and the:
(1) Danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others; (2) Danger of life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; (3) Susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the existing individual owner and future owners of the property; (4) Importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community; (5) Necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable;

(6) Availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage;
(7) Compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; (8) Relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for that area;
(9) Safety of access to the property in time of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; (10) Expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site; and
(11) Costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water system, and streets and bridges.
(b) Variances shall only be issued upon a:
(1) Showing of good and sufficient cause;
(2) Determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional “hardship” (section 15.75.050) to the applicant; and
(3) Determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, or extraordinary public expense, create a nuisance (see “Public safety and nuisance” section 15.75.050), cause “fraud and victimization” (section 15.75.050) of the public, or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. (c) Variances may be issued for new construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development necessary for the conduct of a functionally dependent use provided that the provisions of subsections 15.75.280(a) through 15.75.280(d) are satisfied and that the structure or other development is protected by methods that minimize flood damages during the base flood and does not result in additional threats to public safety and does not create a public nuisance. (d) Upon consideration of the factors of subsection 15.75.270(a) and the purposes of this ordinance, the City Council may attach such conditions to the granting of variances as it deems necessary to further the purposes of this ordinance.
(Code 2002, § 34-153. Ord. No. 10-1)
Article VIII. Other Measures

15.75.290 Hazard mitigation plan and evacuation plan.

The city shall consider the following when reviewing floodplain development applications:
(a) Hazard mitigation plan. The city shall weigh all requests for future floodplain development against the city’s General Plan. Consideration of the following elements is required before approval:

(1) Determination of whether or not a proposed development is in, or affects, a known floodplain;
(2) Determine if there is a practicable alternative or site for the proposed activity; (3) Identify impact of the activity on the floodplain;
(4) Provide a plan to mitigate the impact of the activity. (b) Evacuation plan. There is on file, with the city’s Director of Emergency Services, an evacuation plan, alternate vehicular access and escape route for the benefit of the residents of manufactured home parks and manufactured home subdivisions which are located within zone A of the map identified in section 15.75.070 above.
(Code 2002, § 34-171. Ord. No. 10-1)

Staff Report
Date: October 24, 2023
To: City Council Sitting as the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Board
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Prepared by: Joelle Fockler, MMC, City Clerk
[email protected]
(925) 671-3390
Subject: Considering either appointing Councilmember Nakamura or holding a recruitment to appoint a member of the public as a City of Concord representative to the John Muir Community Health Fund for a term ending December 31, 2026.

Report in Brief
The Concord City Council, sitting as the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Board, appoints three members to the John Muir Community Health Fund Board (CHF).

The CHF Board is responsible for governing the Community Health Fund, which is a tax-exempt, 501(c)3, nonprofit corporation. The CHF functions as a grant making organization. Concord’s current representatives on the CHF are Planning Commissioner Raymond Barbour and Concord residents Niko Anagnostopoulos and Carolyn Fong. Ms. Fong’s term ends on December 31, 2023, and she does not want to serve a third term.

The City Council is being requested to either appoint Councilmember Nakamura or hold a recruitment to appoint a member of the public as a City of Concord representative to the John Muir Community Health Fund Board for a term ending December 31, 2026.

Recommended Action
Take one of the following actions:

1. Appoint Councilmember Nakamura to the John Muir Community Health Fund Board for a term ending December 31, 2026; or

6.a

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
October 24, 2023

2. Announce a recruitment to fill the upcoming vacancy on the CHF and set a deadline of Friday, December 1, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. for applications to be due to the City Clerk.

Background
The City Council, sitting as the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Board, is responsible for making three appointments to the John Muir Community Health Fund Board (CHF).

Board members are responsible for governing the Community Health Fund, which is a tax-exempt, 501(c)3, nonprofit corporation. The primary governing responsibilities include vetting, awarding and monitoring grants, establishing grant making and operating policies, approving annual operating budgets, annually evaluating the Executive Director, and annually electing the officers for the Board of Directors.

The Board members are not compensated for their service on the Board and must operate under the CHF bylaws.

Board member selection criteria for the three members appointed by the City of Concord are as follows:
a. All members shall be at least 18 years of age and reside within the City of Concord or Concord’s Sphere of Influence.
b. Members may be members of the elected Concord City Council, but limited to only two members of the City Council.
c. Members may not be employees of the City of Concord, nor may they be a vendor, contractor or consultant with active contracts or agreements with the City of Concord.
d. Members may be a member of one of Concord’s Boards and Commissions, but may not be currently serving as a member of the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Grant Committee.
e. The City Council serving as the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Board may elect at any public meeting to appoint up to two of its members to serve on the CHF Board prior to opening a recruitment for the remaining members.

Analysis
The CHF Board meetings are held quarterly, begin at noon, and usually last two hours.

A series of grant making and grant monitoring study sessions with nonprofit organizational leaders and consultants are held between Board meetings. Each session generally runs no more than three hours. Additional educational study sessions may be convened during the year to assess and improve the grant programs and grant making strategies, methods, or practices, or to enhance Board members’ understanding of their roles and responsibilities. The 2024 Calendar of Board Meetings and Study Sessions is

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 6.a
October 24, 2023
attached (Attachment 2). Given the high level of engagement that is needed to sit on this Board, the Executive Director of the CHF has requested that whoever is chosen be committed to attending the scheduled board meetings and study sessions. Further the CHF Executive Director will be sharing some thoughts the CHF Board has on the qualities of an outstanding Board appointee with the Council during the presentation section of the Agenda on October 24.

Carolyn Fong has served as one of Concord’s representatives on the CHF since 2017, and she is not interested in serving a third term. Councilmember Nakamura met with John Muir Community Health Fund leadership, understands CHF’s responsibilities, and is interested in serving.

Because the City Council serving as the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Board may elect at any public meeting to appoint up to two of its members to serve on the CHF Board prior to opening a recruitment for the remaining members, Council is being asked to either appoint Councilmember Nakamura to the Board or open a recruitment for the upcoming vacancy with a term ending December 31, 2026.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.

Attachments

1. John Muir Community Health Fund Description of Board Member Responsibilities

2. John Muir Community Health Fund 2024 Calendar of Board Meetings & Study Sessions

2 Board Member Responsibilities
Board Composition
The Community Health Fund (CHF) has a ten (10) member governing board. The John Muir Association appoints five (5) members, the City of Concord appoints three (3) members and the City of Pleasant Hill appoints two (2) members.

General Governing Responsibilities
Board members are responsible for governing the CHF, which is a tax-exempt, 501(c)(3), nonprofit corporation and supporting organization to JMH. The primary governing responsibilities include vetting, awarding and monitoring grants, establishing grantmaking and operating policies, approving annual operating & grantmaking budgets, annually evaluating the Executive Director, and annually electing the officers for the Board of Directors.

Governing Functions
 Participate in strategic planning sessions devoted to evaluating and updating the grant programs and application guidelines, including policies, procedures, funding objectives and strategic directions, and approve revisions as needed
 Participate in the grantmaking process, which includes:
 Participating in business plan and proposal review meetings  Sharing one’s assessment of plans of action with fellow board members in strategic discussions leading to the development of funding recommendations for the Board’s approval
 Reviewing all requests for funding
 Participate in study sessions with funded organizations to learn about progress achieved, challenges encountered & strategies for addressing them, and outcomes from conducting activities funded
 Participate in the process of reviewing and approving the annual operating & grantmaking budgets
 Participate, as requested by the Chair in the annual process of evaluating the performance and compensation of the Executive Director
 Participate in the annual election of officers for the Board of Directors Expected Commitment of Time
 Hybrid board meetings are held quarterly. Periodically, the Chair may call for additional Special Meetings.
 A series of grant making and grant monitoring study sessions with nonprofit organizational leaders and consultants are held between Board meetings. Each 2-day series of sessions generally runs no more than 3-hours.
 Additional educational study sessions may be convened during the year to assess and improve the grant programs and grantmaking strategies, methods or practices, or to enhance Board members’ understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

Attachment 1

10/24/2023
2024 CALENDAR OF HYBRID BOARD MEETINGS & STUDY SESSIONS NOTE: DATES & TIMES SUBJECT TO CHANGE
JANUARY:

Monday, January 22: 10:00 am – 11:30 am
Fiduciary Training & Annual Meeting
FEBRUARY:

Monday, February 12: 10:00 am – 12:30 pm
Study Session to Review Plans, Interim Progress and Final Reports, Compensation Committee Executive Session
Monday, February 26: 10:00 am – 2:00 pm Annual Board Retreat

MARCH:

Monday, March, 25: 10:00 am –12:00 pm
Anti-Racism Training
APRIL:

Monday, April 29, 2023 10:00 – 12:00 pm Community Partner and Board Equity Assessment Meetings ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ May:

Monday, May 20: 10:00 am – 2:00 pm
Presentation from JMH, Chief Strategy Officer
Study Session to Review Plans
JUNE:

Monday, June 24: 10:00 am – 12:30 pm
Board Meeting & 2nd Anti-Racism Training
JULY:

Monday, July 22: 10:00 am – 12:30 pm
Study Session to Review Interim Reports
OCTOBER:

Monday, October 21: 10:00am – 2:00pm
Study Session to Review Plans and Draft 2023 Tax Return DECEMBER:

Monday, December 16: 10:00am – 12:00 pm
Board Meeting
Attachment 2

Staff Report
Date: October 24, 2023
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Mindy Gentry, Planning Manager
Prepared by: Michael Hart, Associate Planner
[email protected]
(925) 603-5821
Subject: Considering adopting a Resolution denying the appeal of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. 23-08 PC and approving the Buttonwood Village Subdivision Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and eight reductions of development standards, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for a small lot development with 14 single-family detached homes on a

1.67-acre site located at 1836 Clayton Way, APN 114-220-019 (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR, RT), subject to conditions of approval.

CEQA: The project is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (“In-fill Development Projects”).

Report in Brief
On July 5, 2023 by a 4-1 vote (Ayes: Barbour, Kaushal, Laub, Mizutani; No: Corio), the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 23-08 PC approving the Buttonwood Village Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and eight reductions of development standards, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for a small lot development with 14 single-family detached homes on a 1.67-acre site at 1836 Clayton Way.

On July 17, 2023, Ivan Gomez (“Appellant”) filed a Notice of Appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the project. For the reasons discussed in greater detail in this report, staff recommends the appeal be denied and the project approval be upheld.

7.a

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
Recommended Action
Adopt a Resolution denying the appeal of the Planning Commission’s adoption of Resolution No. 23-08 PC and approving the Buttonwood Village subdivision Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and eight reductions of development standards, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for a small lot development with 14 single-family detached homes on a

1.67-acre site located at 1836 Clayton Way, APN 114-220-019 (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR, RT), subject to conditions of approval (Attachment 1).

Background
On November 14, 2022, Robert Nichols (“Applicant”), on behalf of the property owner, Darlene Peters, submitted a Preliminary Application for a 14-unit small lot subdivision at the subject site under Senate Bill 330 (SB 330). Planning staff (“staff”) reviewed this application and provided comments to the Applicant prior to the submittal of a formal application for the project.

The project site is located in the northeast area of Concord, between Wren Court and Kevin Place on Clayton Way. A vicinity map is provided below.

The project site is a 1.67-acre parcel with dimensions of approximately 180 feet wide by 405 feet deep. The site is bounded on the southwest by Clayton Way and is currently developed with one single-family dwelling. The existing dwelling was constructed in the early 1900s, is in poor condition, and has been vacant for at least five years. The site

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
contains 12 trees that are classified as protected under the City’s code, all of which are proposed to be removed.

On February 20, 2023, the Applicant submitted a formal application for a Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and reductions of several development standards, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for the 14-lot subdivision (hereafter collectively referred to as “Project”). The Development Advisory Committee (“DAC”) reviewed this application on February 28, and provided comments regarding driveway dimensions, garage dimensions, site visibility, frontage improvements, street lighting, and utility requirements. Staff deemed the application incomplete on March 9, 2023.

On March 28, 2023, the Applicant submitted a response to the incomplete letter, which was routed to DAC for review on April 11, 2023.

On April 18, 2023, staff and the Applicant conducted a neighborhood meeting, which was attended by 13 neighbors. Neighbors provided comments on parking and traffic impacts, loss of existing trees, privacy, and the density of the subdivision.

On April 27, 2023, staff deemed the application incomplete a second time based on the DAC’s comments regarding driveway design and utilities. This same day, the Design Review Board (“DRB”) conducted a Preliminary Design and Site Review of the Project and provided comments regarding landscaping and elevation design and material usage on publicly visible elevations.

On May 4, 2023, the Applicant resubmitted plans to address the remaining incomplete items and the DRB’s comments.

On May 25, 2023, the DRB conducted a Final Design and Site Review for the Project and recommended approval to the Commission by a vote of 5-0 (Ayes: Finn, Leone, Laub, Moore, Shelby).

On June 1, 2023, the application was deemed complete.

On June 20, 2023, the Applicant submitted revised plans to change the perimeter fencing to a seven-foot solid wood fence and install denser shrubs along the fencing adjacent to Buttonwood Lane to attenuate noise and light to neighboring properties, as well as to include additional requests for waivers/reductions of development standards.

Planning Commission July 5th Public Hearing1
In advance of the July 5, 2023, Commission hearing, the City of Concord (City) received two letters, which are summarized below:
1 https://stream.ci.concord.ca.us/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Meetings/ViewMeeting?id=881&doctype=1

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
1) Judy Bastin letter (Correspondence Item #1 to Attachment 3), which included the following objections: a) environmental impacts and loss of wildlife due to removal of trees and noise from construction; b) noise and light pollution impacts from the new homes and vehicles to existing neighborhood; c) excessive number of homes within the development.
2) Sue Dittmann and John Gullixson letter (Correspondence Item #2 to Attachment 3), which included the following objections: a) loss of peace and quiet within the neighborhood; b) construction noise disrupting neighbors’ ability to work from home; c) excessive home sizes and number of homes; d) lack of parking within the development; e) inadequate fencing and distance between the proposed homes and adjoining properties.

In addition, 11 neighbors attended the meeting and voiced concerns regarding the Project, including lack of emergency vehicle access, lack of parking, loss of privacy, excessive Project density, and loss of trees.

Following a presentation from staff and closure of the public comment period, the Commission adopted Resolution 23-08 PC by a vote of 4-1. Generally, the Commissioners liked the design of the homes and expressed a need for additional housing in the City. While the Commissioners expressed understanding of the neighbors’ concerns, they cited the City’s inability to deny housing projects under the State law, SB 330, when housing developments meet applicable objective development standards.

On July 17, 2023, the Appellant submitted an appeal of the Commission’s decision (Attachment 5), the grounds for which are discussed in further detail in the analysis section below.

Housing Accountability Act and Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) Under SB 330 (the Housing Crisis Act of 2019), which amended certain provisions of the “Housing Accountability Act” or HAA2, the state has substantially curtailed local agencies’ ability to deny housing projects, reduce their density, or impose subjective design standards. In summary, if a housing project meets applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and development and design standards, the City of Concord (“City”) may not deny the project or impose conditions that lower its density, unless the City makes specific written findings, based upon a preponderance of evidence, that the project would result in a “specific, adverse impact” on public health and safety.

The HAA defines a “specific, adverse impact” as “a significant, quantifiable, direct, or unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards.” Quantifiable development standards, such as permitted land use classifications, density, height, setbacks, floor area ratio (FAR) and objective design 2 California Government Code Section 65589.5

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
standards would be considered “objective standards.” Factors such as “neighborhood compatibility,” impacts to quiet, privacy or quality of life, or non-compliance with subjective design standards are expressly not to be considered as “specific, adverse impacts” under the HAA.

For the proposed Project, the Applicant submitted all required items for the Preliminary Application on November 14, 2022, which locked in the development standards and fees as of that date. Moreover, as discussed in detail below, the Project meets the applicable objective development and design standards at the required density levels, and staff is unaware of any evidence that the Project would cause “specific adverse impacts,” as contemplated by the HAA.

State Density Bonus Law
A density range between 2.5 and 10 units per net acre is permitted in the RS-10 District (Single-Family Residential; 10,000 square foot minimum lot size), which allows a “base density” of 13 units based on the proposed net acreage of 1.36 acres (9.59 units per net acre). The Project provides 7.7 percent of the base density units at a sales price affordable to a very low-income household; therefore, pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, a project with this level of affordability is entitled to a density bonus of 25 percent above the base density, which in this case is four additional units3. Accordingly, the Project is entitled to build up to 17 total units. The Applicant has elected to build fewer units than allowed under the State Density Bonus Law.

In addition, pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law, developments that are eligible for a density bonus are also eligible to receive one or more “concessions or incentives,” depending on the percentage of affordable units provided.  A concession or incentive includes a reduction in site development standards, a modification of zoning code or architectural design requirements, or other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the local jurisdiction that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions.  A development standard includes a site or construction condition including but not limited to a lot depth, height limitation, setback requirement, floor area ratio, or onsite open-space requirement.

A project that includes at least five, but less than ten, percent of units for very lowincome households is entitled to one concession or incentive. The City is required to grant a requested concession or incentive unless, on the basis of substantial evidence, it makes any of the following findings:
 the concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing;
3 Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, all fractional units are rounded up to the next whole number.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
 the concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact4 upon public health and safety, the physical environment, or an historic resource and there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid that impact; or  the concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law The Applicant is requesting a concession from any utility undergrounding requirements (or in-lieu fees for undergrounding), but has agreed to a condition of approval that, if Lots 1-3 are included in a future undergrounding district to underground utilities along the Clayton Way frontage, all lots in the subdivision would be required to participate in the costs of the undergrounding, and that this requirement would be recorded as part of the CC&Rs or in a deed disclosure. Not imposing this undergrounding requirement provides significant cost reductions to the Project that will facilitate the creation of the affordable unit. Moreover, not undergrounding the utilities would not have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety because it would simply maintain the existing overhead utilities, which are operating safely, and is not contrary to state or federal law. As a result, the Project qualifies for this concession.

The Project also qualifies for a lesser parking ratio pursuant to State Density Bonus Law than is required by Concord Municipal Code (CMC) Section 18.160.040. Under the CMC, each single-family home is required to provide a minimum of two enclosed garage spaces. However, the State Density Bonus Law precludes the City from imposing more than 2.5 spaces per unit for the Project, as a whole, which includes driveway spaces. Therefore, some of the homes in the subdivision are proposed to have a single-car garage and driveway (one covered and one uncovered parking space).

The State Density Bonus Law also prohibits the City from applying any development standard that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the density and with the concessions allowed by the law, and allows applicants to request the waiver or reduction of any such standards. Accordingly, the Applicant is requesting the following development standard reductions:
 Reduction of minimum lot depth for Lots 6 through 9 from 80 feet to 59 feet;  Reduction of private open space requirements under Concord Development Code (CDC) Section 18.150.100(C) for lots 6 through 9 from 300 square feet to 225 square feet;
 Elimination of common open space (interior park) requirement for the Project;  Elimination of any interior sidewalks, other than the connection along Lot 1’s frontage to the sidewalk along Clayton Way;
4 “Specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete (Government Code §65589.5) .

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
 Increase in the maximum lot coverage for Lots 2, 4, and 10 from 50 percent to 53 percent;
 Reduction of the size of the required trees in the C.3 landscape areas from 24-inch boxes to 15-gallon containers;
 Increase in maximum fence height from seven feet (six feet plus one foot of lattice) alongside and rear property lines and three feet along Clayton Way, to seven feet around the entire perimeter; and
 Reduction of the recessed garage requirement of five feet from the primary façade of the residence to three-foot six-inches for Plan 3 and four-foot twoinches for Plan 1X.

The Applicant has demonstrated that strict application of the above list of development standards will have the effect of “physically precluding the construction” of the proposed Project. The strict application of the lot depth, open space, tree, and garage requirements would substantially reduce the building footprint on each lot; therefore, precluding construction of the proposed Project. Application of lot coverage standards would similarly preclude construction of the Project because the maximums would be exceeded. As a result, the Project qualifies for reduction of the above development standards.

Zoning and Development Regulations
As indicated above, the site is zoned RS-10; however, the Applicant is requesting a reduction in lot area pursuant to the “small lot development” process (CDC Chapter

18.155). Additionally, as discussed above, the Applicant is requesting waivers and reductions to several development standards. The Project’s compliance with the applicable objective development standards, as well as the waivers and reductions requested under State law, are noted in Table 1 below. Reduced lot area through the small lot development process, and waivers and reductions under State Density Bonus Law, do not cause a project to be considered non-compliant with applicable objective standards for the purposes of SB 330.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
Table 1: Project Compliance with Small Lot Development Standards5 5 Standards are for individual lots and not for the subdivision as a whole, unless otherwise noted. 6 Exceeds or is below the City standard pursuant to State Density Bonus Law; see “State Density Bonus Law” section for further details.

Standards Required/
Allowed
Provided
Lot Area (min.) 1,920 sq. ft. 2,321–4,900 sq. ft.

Density (max.) 10 du/net acre 10.33 du/net acre6
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.
24 feet 38–46.5 feet
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
30 feet 48.5–48 feet
Lot width (min.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
40 feet 48–49 feet
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.
80 feet 59.5 feet6
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
80 feet 83 feet
Lot Depth (min.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
100 feet 100 feet
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.
55 percent 38–48 percent
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
50 percent 47–53 percent6
Lot Coverage on
Individual Lots (max.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
45 percent 41–43 percent
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.
35 feet Plan 1: 24’-9”
Plan 1X: 27’-1”
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.

Height (max.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
30 feet Plan 2: 26’-9”
Plan 3: 28’-8”
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.

N/A 10.3–15.8 feet
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
10 feet 11–16.5 feet
Front Setback (min.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
15 feet 15–16.5 feet
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.

N/A 5 feet
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
3 feet 4–5.5 feet
Interior Side Setback
(min.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
4 feet 5–5.5 feet
Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.
5 feet 6.5–11.5 feet
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
6 feet 7 feet
Street Side Setback
(min.; corner lots)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
8 feet N/A

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
Analysis
The submitted appeal provides one main assertion as to why the Commission’s decision should be reversed. This point is underlined below, with staff’s analysis immediately following:

Appellant Assertion: “We believe this project is a hazard to our neighborhood and disrupts the enjoyment of our property (e.g. private nuisance). We also seek more info on our rights.”
Staff Response: This statement constitutes the entirety of the submitted appeal, and the appeal provides no further explanation or evidence as to how the Project is a “hazard” or “disrupts the enjoyment of [neighbors’] property”.

Pursuant to SB 330, the City’s review of housing projects is limited to applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and development standards. The City cannot impose any restrictions or conditions that would reduce the Project’s density or be based on subjective standards. Furthermore, the City may not deny the Project unless specific written findings are made that the Project would result in a “specific, adverse impact” on Lots 1,920 –
2,999 sq. ft.

N/A 5 feet
Lots 3,000 –
3,999 sq. ft.
10 feet 10–12 feet
Rear Setback (min.)
Lots 4,000 –
4,999 sq. ft.
15 feet 23 feet
Aggregate Lot Coverage (max.) 40 percent 33 percent
Landscape Strip Adjoining RS district
(min. width)
5 feet 5 feet
Building setback from adjacent RS
district (min.)
8 feet 8 feet
Private 300 square feet 225–1,613 square
feet6
Open Space per lot
Common 175 square feet
(2,450 sq. ft.)
0 6
Parking Spaces (min.) 2.5 spaces/unit
(35 total spaces)7
48 spaces
Fence Height (max.) 3 ft. in front yards;
6 ft. in side & rear
yards (plus 1 ft.
lattice)
7 foot solid wood
fence along Clayton
Way and adjacent
to Buttonwood
Lane6; 6 ft. (plus 1
ft. lattice)
surrounding
remaining site
perimeter and in
side and rear yards

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
public health and safety as defined in state law. As discussed in the July 5, 2023 Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 3) and shown in Table 1 above, the Project meets the applicable objective development and design standards at the required density level, including standards for parking, emergency access and street width, and no evidence has been submitted that the Project would cause any “specific, adverse impact” on public health and safety. The above appeal assertion does not demonstrate the Project’s failure to meet any applicable objective standard, or that the Project would cause any “specific, adverse impact” to public health and safety. Loss of privacy, quiet, convenience, and neighborhood character are not “specific, adverse impacts” within the meaning of SB 330.

According to State Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915(p)(1)), “upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county shall not require a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, of [a housing development] that exceeds the following ratios…[f]our and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces…” Under the State Density Bonus Law’s parking standard of 2.5 parking spaces per unit (with no guest parking required), the Project is required to provide a minimum of 35 parking spaces. Through a mixture of garage and driveway parking, the Project is proposing to provide a total of 48 parking spaces, which meets the minimum required.

The findings for the Planned Development Use Permit include a finding that “the design, location, shape, size, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access and public services and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water) will ensure that the development would not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or be injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.” As discussed earlier in this report, the Project is in conformance with the allowable density under State Density Bonus Law and the City’s small lot development standards, except where relief is granted under the State Density Bonus Law (as discussed above, such relief does trigger non-compliance with applicable objective standards for the purposes of SB 330).

Streets meet the minimum width required for access for a subdivision of this size, and the City’s Transportation Division has reviewed the proposed plans and determined that the existing off-site street network and on-site streets are adequate to serve the anticipated traffic volume. Additionally, the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) has reviewed the Project, and concluded that the Project provided sufficient emergency access, including compliance with objective vehicle access and turnaround requirements.

Based on the above, there is not the necessary substantial evidence that the Project creates a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety to grant the appeal and overturn the Commission’s approval of the Project. Further, it should be noted that the Project design does take the privacy of neighboring properties into account. The perimeter of the site will be lined with evergreen trees for screening to enhance privacy

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
and natural beauty, and the landscaped strip between the Project’s main access road (Buttonwood Lane) and neighboring properties also includes a privet hedge to further decrease light pollution to the neighboring properties.

Last, the Appellant asks for more explanation of their rights. Staff has provided substantial explanation throughout the course of the project review on state laws applicable to the project and their impacts on the Planning Commission and Council’s discretion. These impacts and the neighbors’ rights have been discussed with community members at the neighborhood meeting, Design Review Board meetings, Planning Commission meeting and again in this staff report for Council. Further, prior to this Council meeting staff reached out to the Appellant to explain the State laws and respond to any specific questions he might have.

Financial Impact
The proposed Project would have a negligible beneficial fiscal impact on the City through additional property and sales tax revenues.

Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et. seq., as amended and implementing State CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (collectively “CEQA”), the proposed Project is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (“In-fill Development Projects”) as the Project: (a) is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies, as well with applicable zoning designation and regulations; (b) occurs within city limits on a project site of not more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; (c) is located on a site with no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; (d) will not result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and (d) can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

To assist the City in its analysis as to whether this Categorical Exemption applies, the City (as the lead agency) directed Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) to prepare a Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report (Exhibit A to Attachment 1). Rincon reviewed the Project and all necessary information to provide a determination that all criteria of the Class 32 exemption listed above would apply to the Project. Based on the resulting analysis, the proposed Project meets all criteria for the Class 32 exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Furthermore, none of the exceptions to categorical exemptions found in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(c) apply, because the Project: 1) is not located in a sensitive environment; 2) will not cause a cumulative impact due to successive projects of the same type in the same area; 3) will not have a significant effect on the environment due to a cumulative impact of other projects or unusual circumstances; 4) will not result in damage to scenic resources; 5) is not located on a site which is

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 7.a
October 24, 2023
included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code; and 6) will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Therefore, the proposed Project does not warrant further environmental review.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted. In addition, per CMC 18.500.020, a notification was mailed to all owners and occupants of properties within 500 feet of the subject parcel and to those who opted into the interested parties list at least 10 days prior to the public hearing, and has been published in the East Bay Times, as required by the Concord Municipal Code. This item has also been posted at the Civic Center and at the subject site at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. The Appellant and the Applicant have also been provided notification.

Attachments

1. Resolution denying the Appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the Buttonwood Village Tentative Map, Density Bonus, Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit Exhibit A: Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report
Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval

2. Project Plans, date stamped received June 20, 2023

3. Link to July 5, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report

4. July 5, 2023, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

5. July 17, 2023, Notice of Appeal

Res. No. 23-XX 1

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A Resolution Denying the Appeal of the Planning
Commission’s Adoption of Resolution No. 23-08 PC
and Approving the Buttonwood Village Subdivision
Tentative Map, Density Bonus with One Concession
and Eight Reductions of Development Standards,
Planned Unit Development Use Permit, Design and
Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for a Small
Lot Development with 14 Single-Family Detached
Homes on a 1.67-Acre Site located at 1836 Clayton
Way, (APN 114-220-019) (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR,
RT), subject to Conditions of Approval
Resolution No. 23-XX
/
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2022, Robert Nichols (“Applicant”), on behalf of property owner Darlene Peters, submitted a Preliminary Application for a proposed 14-unit small lot subdivision under Government Code section 65941.1; and
WHEREAS, on February 20, 2023, the Applicant submitted a formal application for a Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and reductions of development standards pursuant to State Density Bonus Law (“SDBL”), Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for Buttonwood Village subdivision (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR, RT, hereafter collectively referred to as “Project”); and
WHEREAS, on February 28, 2023, the Development Advisory Committee (DAC) reviewed the Project and provided comments regarding driveway and garage dimensions, site visibility, frontage improvements, street lighting, and utility requirements; and WHEREAS, on March 9, 2023, staff determined the standard application to be incomplete based on the DAC’s comments; and
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2023, the Applicant submitted revised plans in response to staff’s incomplete letter; and
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2023, the Project was re-reviewed by the DAC and provided comments regarding utilities and driveway design; and
Attachment 1

Res. No. 23-XX 2
WHEREAS, on April 18, 2023, staff and the Applicant conducted a neighborhood meeting, which was attended by 13 neighbors who provided comments on parking and traffic impacts, loss of existing trees, privacy, and project density; and
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2023, the Project was deemed incomplete a second time based on DAC’s comments; and
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2023, the Design Review Board (DRB) conducted a Preliminary Design and Site Review of the Project and provided comments regarding landscaping, elevation design, and material usage; and
WHEREAS, on May 4, 2023, the Applicant resubmitted plans to address the remaining incomplete items and the DRB comments; and
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2023, the DRB recommended Design and Site Review approval for the Project with a vote of 5-0 (Ayes: Finn, Leone, Laub, Moore, Shelby); and WHEREAS, on June 1, 2023, the application for the Project was deemed complete for processing; and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2023, the Applicant submitted revised plans to change the perimeter fencing to a seven foot solid wood fence and plant denser shrubs along the fencing adjacent to Buttonwood Lane as well as additional requests for waivers to the development standards, including increasing maximum fence height to seven feet along Clayton Way and the site perimeter and reduction of the recessed garage requirement of five feet from the primary façade to three-foot sixinches for Plan 3 and four-foot two-inches for Plan 1X; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15532 (Infill Exemption), on behalf of the City, Rincon prepared a Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report (attached hereto as Exhibit A), which concluded based on the resulting analysis that the Project meets all criteria for the Class 32 exemption; and
//
//

Res. No. 23-XX 3
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after giving all public notices required by state law and the Concord Municipal Code, held a duly noticed public hearing on July 5, 2023, on the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered testimony and information received at the public hearing and the oral and written reports from City staff dated July 5, 2023, as well as other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the Project, which are maintained at the offices of the City of Concord Planning Division, (“Planning Commission Project Information”); and WHEREAS, on July 5, 2023, the Planning Commission, after consideration of all pertinent plans, documents, and testimony, declared its intent to approve the Project subject to the Conditions of Approval contained herein as Exhibit B.

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2023, Ivan Gomez (“Appellant”) submitted a Notice of Appeal on the July 5, 2023, decision of the Planning Commission’s adoption of Resolution No. 23-08 PC; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after giving all public notices required by state law and the Concord Municipal Code, held a duly noticed public hearing on October 3, 2023, on the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered testimony and information received at the public hearing including the oral and written reports from City staff dated October 3, 2023, plans and exhibits presented, as well as other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the proposed Project, which are maintained at the offices of the City of Concord Planning Division and are incorporated herein by reference (hereinafter referred to collectively with the Planning Commission Project Information, as the “City Council Project Information”); and WHEREAS, on October 3, 2023, the City Council, after consideration of the City Council Project Information, declared its intent to deny the appeal of Resolution No. 23-08 PC and approve the Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and eight reductions of development standards pursuant to State Density Bonus Law (“SDBL”), Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for Buttonwood Village subdivision (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR, RT) located at 1836 Clayton Way, APN 114-220-019, subject to the Final Conditions of Approval attached

Res. No. 23-XX 4
hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B (“Conditions of Approval”).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council does hereby deny the appeal of Resolution No. 23-08 PC, and does hereby approve the Tentative Map, Density Bonus with one concession and eight reductions of development standards pursuant to State Density Bonus Law (“SDBL”), Planned Development Use Permit, Design and Site Review, and Tree Removal Permit for Buttonwood Village subdivision (PL23017 – TM, UP, DR, RT) located at 1836 Clayton Way, APN 114-220-019, subject to Conditions of Approval, and further makes the following findings:

Section 2. The recitals above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

The recitals constitute findings in this matter, and together with the other City Council Project Information, serve as an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution.

Section 3. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 “In-Fill Development Projects,” as demonstrated in Attachment B of the staff report, the Project is classified as a Class 32 Categorical Exemption, as the Project: a) is consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning; b) occurs within city limits on a project site no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; c) has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; d) will have no significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality; and e) is located on a site that can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

2. Furthermore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(c), there are no exceptions to the Class 32 Categorical Exemption, because the Project: a) is not located in a sensitive environment; b) will not cause a cumulative impact due to successive projects of the same type in the same area; c) will not have a significant effect on the environment due to a cumulative impact of other projects or unusual circumstances; 4) will not result in damage to scenic resources; d) is not located on

Res. No. 23-XX 5
a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code; and e) will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

Section 4. Housing Accountability Act California’s Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”; Government Code Section 65589.5) generally prohibits the denial of housing projects due to noncompliance with subjective design standards. Therefore, any of the following findings which are “subjective” as defined in the HAA are provided only for informational purposes and are not legally required for approval of this Project.

Section 5. General Plan

1. Low Density Residential. The Project’s density of 10.33 dwelling units per net acre exceeds the density range of 2.5 – 10 dwelling units per net acre allowed under the Low-Density Residential land use designation; however, as indicated in the Development Code section below, the increase in density is allowed as a result of the Project’s adherence to SDBL.

2. Support land use decisions that reinforce and capitalize on neighborhood strengths and benefit neighborhood identity and scale (LU-1.1.1). The Project is consistent with this policy because it incorporates several important design features of the surrounding neighborhood, including high quality materials, a variety of traditional architectural styles and color and massing schemes, as well as abundant new trees and other plants.

3. Require new development in residential areas to preserve and enhance positive neighborhood characteristics (LU-1.1.2). The Project is consistent with this policy for the same reasons discussed above under Policy LU-1.1.1.

4. Protect residential uses from the impacts of more intensive land uses through good site planning and/or appropriate mitigation and operational measures (LU-1.1.4). The Project is carefully sited to avoid negative impacts to the surrounding neighbors to the greatest extent feasible. Driveways are positioned to not point directly at the neighboring existing residences to reduce light and noise from vehicles, and evergreen screening trees are positioned around the site perimeter to decrease visibility into neighboring lots from second story windows. A privet shrub is proposed along the fence

Res. No. 23-XX 6
line adjacent to Buttonwood Lane to further reduce noise and light from vehicles. Construction noise will be mitigated through limiting construction activities to Monday through Friday from 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

5. Encourage a variety of housing types in infill development sites (LU-1.3.1). The houses generally found in the vicinity of the Project site include single-story detached single-family homes on relatively large lots (7,000 to 10,000 square foot minimum lot sizes). The Project provides a greater variety of housing types in the vicinity by providing two story homes on much smaller lots (2,321 to 4,900 square feet), thereby providing a more affordable housing product. The Project includes three architectural styles (Craftsman, European Cottage, and Farmhouse) with six different varieties of color and material schemes to provide internal variation.

6. Promote the development of housing that provides ownership opportunities that are affordable to extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households. (Policy H-1.3) The Project will provide one deed-restricted home that will be affordable to very low-income households; therefore, promoting the development of affordable single-family homes in existing neighborhoods.

7. Promote the development, conservation, and rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to extremely-low, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households (Policies H-1.5). The Project will provide one deed-restricted home that will be affordable to very low-income households.

8. Promote a diversity of housing types, including efforts to increase rental and ownership opportunities for moderate- and above-moderate income households (Policy H-1.7). The Project creates 13 new homes for above-moderate income households, and one for very low-income households. The proposed lots and houses are smaller than most existing single-family residential developments in Concord, thereby increasing the diversity and affordability of the for-sale housing stock.

9. Require all new development to locate structures to accommodate ultimate street widths and required setbacks, provide adequate right-of-way, and construct ultimate on and off-site improvements (Policies T-1.1.6 and T-1.1.7). The Project includes improvements to the Clayton Way

Res. No. 23-XX 7
street frontage for the length of the property by installing a new driveway, curb, gutter, curb ramps, sidewalk, and landscaping in conformance with City standards for right-of-way improvements.

10. Enhance the visual quality of public space through the design and landscaping of streets, and control of visual and functioning aspects of abutting improvements (Policy T-1.1.15). The Project will improve the visual character along Clayton Way with the installation of a new public improvements, including a sidewalk, curb, gutter, and landscaping along the Project frontage. The landscaping will include a variety of shrubs and grasses, as well as installation of four coast live oak street trees.

11. Continue to provide and enhance landscaped medians and street edges that are visually pleasing and provide shade and buffers for pedestrians and cyclists; landscaping should use native or low-water plants and reduce stormwater runoff to the greatest extent possible (Policy T1.1.16). The Applicant will be providing new landscaping and sidewalk along the Clayton Way frontage. The landscaping will utilize low ornamental grasses that are low water usage and will help control stormwater runoff. Additionally, the Applicant will be planting four Live Oak street trees along this frontage that will provide shade to pedestrians and cyclists.

Section 6. Residential Density and Affordability
The Project is consistent with the City’s adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element inventory for meeting its share of the regional housing needs by providing 14 units, including one unit affordable to “very low-income” households.

Section 7. Development Code and State Density Bonus Law

1. Density Bonus. As proposed, the 14-unit Project on a 1.36 net acre site would exceed the maximum density of the LDR (Low Density Residential) zoning district of 10 units per acre by approximately 0.3 units. However, pursuant to SDBL and Concord Development Code Section

18.185.050(A), the maximum density of a project may be increased by a maximum of 25 percent for projects with seven percent or more units affordable to very low-income households. As the Project provides one unit (7.7 percent) of the “base density” of 13 units as a very low-income affordable unit,

Res. No. 23-XX 8
the Project is entitled to the requested 25 percent increase in density (four units), but the Applicant has elected to receive a smaller bonus of one unit (7.7 percent).

2. Density Bonus Incentives and Concessions. The Applicant is requesting a concession for relief from any requirement or in-lieu fee for undergrounding of overhead utilities; however, has agreed to a condition of approval that, if there is a future local undergrounding district along the Clayton Way frontage, all lots in the subdivision would be required to participate in the costs of the undergrounding, and that this requirement would be recorded as part of the CC&Rs or in a deed disclosure. Pursuant to SDBL, because the Project has provided 7.7 percent of the “base density” of 13 units for very low-income households, the City is required to grant the requested concession unless, on the basis of substantial evidence, the City makes any of the following findings:
(i) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing;
(ii) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety, the physical environment, or an historic resource and there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid that impact; or
(iii) The development incentives or concessions would be contrary to state or federal law.

For this Project, the City does not make these findings as the Applicant has demonstrated that relief from the undergrounding requirement provides significant cost reductions to the Project that will facilitate the creation of the affordable unit. Moreover, the relief from undergrounding would not have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety of the physical environment and is not contrary to state or federal law. As a result, the Applicant qualifies for this request as a concession for the Project. Accordingly, the Applicant is entitled to the relief of the utility undergrounding requirement as a concession.

3. Density Bonus Development Standard Waivers. The Applicant is requesting a waiver from the following standards:

Res. No. 23-XX 9
 Reduction of minimum lot depth for Lots 6 through 9 from 80 feet to 59 feet;  Reduction of private open space requirements under Concord Development Code (CDC) Section 18.150.100(C) for lots 6 through 9 from 300 square feet to 225 square feet;
 Elimination of common open space (interior park) requirement for the Project;  Elimination of any interior sidewalks, other than the connection along Lot 1’s frontage to the sidewalk along Clayton Way;
 Increase in the maximum lot coverage for Lots 2, 4, and 10 from 50 percent to 53 percent;
 Reduction of the size of the required trees in the C.3 landscape areas from 24-inch boxes to 15-gallon containers;
 Increase in maximum fence height from seven feet (six feet plus one foot of lattice) along side and rear property lines and three feet along Clayton Way, to seven feet around the entire perimeter; and
 Reduction of the recessed garage requirement of five feet from the primary façade of the residence to three-foot six-inches for Plan 3 and four-foot two-inches for Plan 1X.

Pursuant to state law and Concord Municipal Code (CMC) Section 18.185.050(I), in addition to Density Bonus Incentives and Concessions, an Applicant may propose waivers or modifications of development standards if the established standards would physically preclude the construction of a project meeting the Density Bonus criteria.
(i) The Applicant has demonstrated that strict application of the lot coverage development standard will have the effect of “physically precluding the construction” of an affordable project with the allowed densities because the Project is physically constrained and strict application of the requirement would substantially reduce the building footprint on the site, which is not feasible without substantially increasing construction costs. Accordingly, the Applicant is entitled to the above referenced waivers or modifications to development standards.

Res. No. 23-XX 10

4. With the exception of the allowable concession and waivers granted or allowed under SDBL, the Project meets all other standards for RS-10 zoning, standards for the CMC Chapter 18.155 pertaining to Small Lot Developments, and all applicable requirements under Development Code, Article IV, Development Standards.

Section 8. Tentative Subdivision Map

1. The proposed map is consistent with the general plan, any applicable specific plan, any policy or guideline implementing the general plan, the Development Code, and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The Project falls within the density allowed under SDBL by providing a density of 10.33 dwelling units per net acre where up to 13 dwelling units per net acre would be allowed. The Project is consistent with General Plan and Development Code policies related to residential development, as set forth in detail below. Further, the Project is in conformance with the applicable subdivision standards found in CMC Title 17, including installation of the required frontage improvements, utilities, street lighting, and street trees.

2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and density of development. The site is flat and has no physical constraints that make it unsuitable for the proposed type and density of residential development. The Project is in conformance with most zoning standards for the district and is requesting relief under SDBL from other development standards that are not met. All necessary utilities and access to the site are available from Clayton Way.

3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. As discussed in the attached Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc., the Project will not result in substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat because the site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species nor do these species have a potential to occur on the Project site on more than a transitory or very occasional basis.

4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not cause serious public

Res. No. 23-XX 11
health problems. The subdivision and its related improvements are typical of residential development in the RS zoning district and are not a threat to human health or the environment. The Project will be subject to a standard condition of approval requiring implementation of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s “Basic Control Measures” to reduce dust emissions to a less-than-significant level during construction.

5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The city may approve a tentative map if it finds that alternative easements for access will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This finding applies only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. No qualifying easements exist on the site.

6. The design of the subdivision shall provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive and natural heating and cooling features in accordance with Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act. In the summer months, the Project will provide passive cooling with roof eaves, operable windows, and shade trees. In the winter months, passive heating will be achieved through southeast facing windows.

7. Water will be available and sufficient to serve a proposed subdivision with more than 500 dwelling units in accord with Section 66473.7 of the Subdivision Map Act. This finding does not apply because the Project will not result in more than 500 dwelling unit.

Section 9. Use Permit

1. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provision of the Development Code and the CMC. The Project meets Small Lot Development Standards for lot area, lot coverage, setbacks, density, lot width, and maximum building height. The Project does not meet the requirements for lot depth and private open space for Lots 6 through 9, and common open space area. However, relief from these requirements is being requested under SDBL.

Res. No. 23-XX 12

2. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan.

See General Plan findings above. A specific plan does not apply to the Project site.

3. The design location, size, operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity. Although the surrounding homes are older, the Project meets this finding because it the Project has the same use as the surrounding singlefamily detached homes and will improve and enhance an underutilized site with new homes designed in traditional architectural styles to complement the neighborhood’s design.

4. The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of the proposed use, including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints. The site is flat and has no physical constraints that make it unsuitable for the proposed type and density of residential development. The Project is in conformance with most zoning standards for the district and is requesting relief under SDBL from other development standards that are not met. All necessary utilities and access to the site are available from Clayton Way.

5. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the persons residing or working in the subject neighborhood or materially detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district where the property is located. The development of the site with 14 single-family dwellings would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of surrounding residences for the reasons discussed in Findings 1-4 above. The RS10 zoning district allows single-family dwellings by right, and SDBL allows for a density bonus and relief from development standards with the inclusion of a dwelling unit affordable to a very lowincome household.

Section 10. Planned Development Use Permit

1. The development is in conformance with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. See General Plan findings above. There is no applicable specific plan.

2. The development is in conformance with applicable provisions of the development code and the CMC, relating to both on- and off-site improvements necessary to accommodate flexibility in

Res. No. 23-XX 13
site planning and property development and to carry out the purpose and intent of the zoning district.

Private access roads would be provided with curb and gutter improvements for roadway designs that meet fire truck turnaround standards as well as all required public street improvements along Clayton Way. Condition of Approval #37 requires installation of improvements along the Project’s Clayton Way frontage, including new sidewalk, curb and gutter, and a landscaping strip with street trees. The Project is also in conformance with the stormwater requirements with the proposed detention basins, as well as meeting minimum building setbacks, height, and lot dimensions. The Project is also seeking relief of development standards in conformance with SDBL.

3. The development is a comprehensive development that provides a more enhanced environment and architectural excellence (e.g., varied structure placement and orientation, mix of building sizes and types of dwellings, high quality architectural design and materials, increased landscaping and open space, improved solutions to the design and placement of parking facilities, etc.) than would normally be possible under conventional zoning requirements. Through its building architecture, landscape architecture, and site planning, the proposed Project is a cohesive, comprehensive development, but with appropriate variation in individual house design and materials to avoid a uniform look. By providing single-family detached houses on small lots and relatively narrow streets, the Project creates a relatively unique type of residential development in Concord. The reduced lot sizes and street widths will reduce the sales prices of these lots, thereby helping to provide a more affordable alternative to traditional larger-lot developments (including one unit designated for very low-income households), and partially addressing the City’s housing need.

4. The development is compatible and well-integrated with existing, adjacent neighborhoods. The Project integrates well with the existing neighborhood by providing 70 new trees on the site, including 29 trees along the side and rear property lines to screen views from existing adjacent houses. While the proposed homes are taller than those typically found in the surrounding neighborhood, they enhance the neighborhood with attractive, well-articulated, traditional architectural designs to complement the neighborhood’s design vernacular. Additionally, abundant

Res. No. 23-XX 14
new landscaping will further enhance the neighborhood to provide a harmonious transition between the Project and surrounding development.

5. The various elements of the development, including buildings, infrastructure, landscaping, private and common open space, work together to form a comprehensive plan of sufficient unity to justify exceptions to the development standards identified in the applicable zoning district. As discussed above, the Project provides a cohesive, comprehensive development through its site planning, architecture, and landscape design while still providing enough variation in individual house design and material choices to avoid a uniform look. The smaller lot sizes will help to provide more affordable housing than the larger lots normally required by the RS-10 district, while still maintaining a comprehensive and desirable development, thereby justifying the exceptions to the RS10 development standards.

6. The design, location, shape, size, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access and public services and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water) will ensure that the development would not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or be injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The design, location, shape, size of the Project is in conformance with the allowable density under SDBL and the City’s small lot development standards (except where relief is granted under SDBL) and will be built in conformance with all applicable laws; therefore, the Project will not create a hazard to public health, safety, or general welfare, or injurious to the surrounding properties.

The Project would connect to existing utilities on Clayton Way including water, wastewater, storm drain, gas, electrical, and telecommunications. The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) reviewed the Project plans and concluded that the Project provides sufficient emergency access. Further, the project minimizes impacts to neighboring properties through providing landscape screening through evergreen trees and privet hedges.

7. The site is:
a) Physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of the development. The site

Res. No. 23-XX 15
is flat and has no physical constraints that make it unsuitable for the proposed type and density of development.
b) Adequate in shape and size to accommodate the development. The site adequately accommodates the proposed units and their associated yard areas within the allowable density range of the LDR General Plan designation and RS-10 zoning district with a 7.7 percent density bonus, and the Project complies with applicable small lot development standards (except where relief is granted under SDBL) and engineering standards for road width, utilities, and other requirements. c) Served by streets of adequate capacity for the traffic generated by the development. The City’s Transportation Division has reviewed the proposed plans and determined that the existing off-site street network and proposed on-site streets are adequate to serve the anticipated traffic volume. Further, the City of Concord adopted Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening and Significance Thresholds based on the California Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) recommended VMT thresholds. Under the City’s VMT Screening Criteria, a residential project is presumed to result in less than significant VMT impacts if it has fewer than 20 units. As the Project would involve the construction of 14 units, it would therefore have a less than significant VMT impact. Additionally, the Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report provided by Rincon Consultants, Inc. reviewed potential traffic impacts, and found that there would be no significant impacts related to traffic.

8. The public need for, and the positive benefits to be derived from, the project clearly outweigh any potential negative effects it may cause. As noted in the “Environmental Determination” section below, the CEQA analysis for the Project demonstrates there are no significant environmental impacts. There is a public need for more affordably priced housing in California and the City of Concord, which the Project will help meet by providing 14 houses on smaller lots than traditional single-family detached developments, including one house that will be restricted to very low-income households. This benefit outweighs any potential negative effects including increased traffic and noise, loss of privacy, tree removal, and other changes to the visual character of the site.

Res. No. 23-XX 16
Section 11. Design and Site Review

1. The project is consistent with the general plan. See General Plan findings above.

2. The project meets the [following] relevant criteria in CDC 18.415.080 (Design criteria):
(a) The building design and landscaping supports public safety and security by allowing for surveillance of the street by people inside buildings and elsewhere on the site. Each house will have at least one window and/or main entrance facing one of the interior streets, as well as low shrubs and groundcovers in the front yard, for improved surveillance of the street from within the homes and elsewhere on the site.
(b) The design is compatible with the historical or visual character of any area recognized by the City as having such character. The Project area is not formally recognized having special historical or visual character.
(c) The project design preserves major view and vistas along major streets and open spaces and trails and enhances them by providing project amenities. The Project site and surrounding area are flat and have no topographical features, such as hillsides or ridgelines that provide or are part of scenic views or vistas. The site is not located near any major streets, open spaces, or trails. (d) The proposed lighting and fixtures are designed to complement on-site buildings, are of an appropriate scale for the development, and provide adequate light for safety and security while minimizing glare. Exterior lighting and fixtures are residential in type and character, shielded to minimize glare, and will improve nighttime visibility, security, and safety for pedestrians and vehicles. Lighting is focused in the front yard areas and along private roadways with downward facing lighting. Condition of Approval (COA) #36 has been included to ensure the lights and glare are shielded from adjacent properties and the public right-of-way. (e) All mechanical, electrical, and utility equipment is located, screened, or incorporated into the design of the buildings so as not to be visible from off-site, and screening devices are consistent with the exterior colors and materials of the buildings. The Project conditions require final

Res. No. 23-XX 17
details of mechanical, electrical, and utility equipment to be shown on building permit plans to ensure they are located behind fencing or screened so as not to be visible from off-site. (f) The overall design of the project, including its scale, massing, site plan, exterior design, and landscaping, enhances the appearance and features of the project site and surrounding natural and built environment. Refinements to the Project design have been incorporated to ensure the Project is appropriate for the surrounding environment, including its scale, exterior design, and landscaping. The DRB reviewed the Project and found that overall, the design is appropriate for the surrounding environment, including its scale, massing, site plan, and exterior design. The buildings will incorporate a high-quality architectural design. The front yard areas, Buttonwood Lane, and the frontage along Clayton Way will be well landscaped resulting in visual enhancements to the Project when viewed from the public right-of-way and the access easement. While rear yards will be largely untouched to allow future property owners to personalize these areas, backyards and side yards that abut existing residential properties will be lined with trees for screening to enhance privacy and natural beauty.
(g) The project design is appropriate to the function of the project and will provide an attractive and comfortable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community. The Project includes, among other things, the following design features to enhance the functionality of the proposed homes and the attractiveness and comfort of the general community: landscaping that provides screening and shade; traditional architecture; frontage improvements along Clayton Way (specifically new curb and gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, and street trees); and stormwater facilities to reduce and treat runoff.
(h) The architectural details, colors, materials, and landscaping are internally consistent, fully integrated with one another, and used in a manner that is visually consistent with the proposed architectural design. The DRB reviewed the proposed building and landscape architecture, and found that overall, the various design features are internally consistent and integrated with one another. The proposed styles and materials share an overall similar aesthetic but are varied enough to provide

Res. No. 23-XX 18
diversity among the different designs. A variety of colors are proposed for each residence, however shared colors for trim and similar roof and stone materials provide cohesion between the different architectural designs.
(i) The project is compatible with neighboring development in a similar Zoning District by avoiding large differences in building scale and character and provides a harmonious transition between the proposed project and surrounding development. The Project integrates well with the existing neighborhood by providing homes of similar character with both front yard and rear yard landscaping that will help screen views and enhance privacy between existing and proposed homes.

While the proposed homes are taller than those typically found in the surrounding neighborhood, they enhance the neighborhood with attractive, well-articulated homes designed in traditional architectural styles to complement the neighborhood’s design vernacular. Additionally, abundant new landscaping will further enhance the neighborhood to provide a harmonious transition between the Project and surrounding development.
(j) The project creates an attractive and visually interesting built environment with a variety of building styles and designs, well-articulated structures that present varied building facades, rooflines, and building heights within a unifying context. The Project meets this criterion by incorporating various design elements including varied roof forms; decorative elements such as covered entries and porches and a mix of building materials, all of which create varying textures and give a high-quality appearance to the buildings. Similarities in the design elements (e.g. gable roof ends, trim design), materials (e.g. stucco siding, lap siding), and colors between the homes create a unifying context for the Project.
(k) The landscaping is compatible with and enhances the architectural character of the buildings and site features, and blends with the surrounding landscape. Landscape elements complement the buildings and rooflines through color, texture, density, and form. Landscaping is in scale with on-site and off-site buildings, and plantings have been selected and located to avoid conflicts with views, lighting, infrastructure, utilities, and signage. The DRB has reviewed the

Res. No. 23-XX 19
landscape plan and determined it is compatible with and enhances the architectural character of the Project by providing accent trees that soften views of the buildings from the interior of the Project and adjacent properties, providing shade for the proposed homes, using landscaping that is compatible with the scale of the Project and avoiding conflicts with visibility at intersections by using lowgrowing plant materials. (l) Stormwater treatment areas have been integrated into the landscape design. The proposed landscaping on the perimeters of the stormwater treatment areas includes trees, shrubs and ornamental grasses. In addition, the plants within the basins include a number of drought-tolerant, California native species that reflect the overall aesthetic of the Project landscape plan. These plantings will integrate the treatment areas into the overall landscape design. (m) New construction does not need to match existing surrounding development or buildings; however, the design shall complement or enhance existing development. The Project does not match surrounding homes, which are older and generally not as tall, but it enhances the neighborhood with attractive, well-articulated new homes designed in traditional architectural styles to complement the neighborhood’s design vernacular. Abundant new landscaping will further enhance the neighborhood.

3. The project overall reflects design principles and/or incorporates design features that are consistent with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council that are in effect at the time of approval. The project is consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines, adopted by the Council in August 1987. Following are several key guidelines and staff’s analysis of how the project conforms to each.
(a) Guideline 4.100: In general no rigid design themes are established in Concord, but it is desirable that there by some compatibility of color, materials, or design motifs that will allow a project to blend into its setting. Selection of roof materials and color palettes can often be crucial in determining whether a project fits its context. The proposed architectural styles, color and materials are characteristic of, or compatible with, surrounding development. The proposed styles reflect a

Res. No. 23-XX 20
vernacular that is predominant in the neighborhood, which includes numerous ranch, traditional, and Craftsman style houses. Proposed colors consist of earth tones and proposed building materials are stucco, horizontal wood siding, stone, and bricks, traditional materials commonly found in the vicinity.
(b) Guideline 4.101: Scale relationships must be carefully considered, and appropriate transitions provided where a change of scale is required. See discussion under Finding 2(i) above. (c) Guideline 4.11: Sensitivity to the environment created by the street, and the view along the street, will require attention to landscaping, building placement, massing, rhythm, materials and colors, all with respect to their impact on the user of the street. Landscaping and street trees are proposed along Clayton Way. Additional landscaping will be proposed along the private access drive (Buttonwood Lane), as well as front yard landscaping along the two proposed courts. Planted bioswales are proposed at the end of Butttonwood Lane as well as each of the courts. (d) Guideline 4.201: Setbacks along city streets outside of the Downtown Core must be designed to reinforce a spacious suburban character and a sense of consistent streetscape. See discussion under Findings 2(h) and 3(c) above.
(e) Guideline 4.212: Exterior side yard setback areas (i.e., alongside streets) and building elevations along these setbacks should be treated with the same quality of design and materials as the front setback area and front building elevations. The Project does not create any lots with an exterior side along a public street.
(f) Guideline 4.217: A building entrance should be easily identifiable and be a transition between the outside and the inside area. Building entries should also provide adequate lighting for security, but not impact adjacent properties. All proposed houses will have an easily identifiable entrance facing the interior streets, with front lighting fixtures to provide moderate illumination.

Lighting will be subject to the City’s standard conditions, which prohibit light trespass onto adjacent properties.
(g) Guideline 4.221: Retention of natural grades and recognition of established off-site

Res. No. 23-XX 21
grades should be the objective of all grading plans. Extensive cuts or fills to create level building pads should be avoided, as should extensive retaining walls along property lines. The Project will maintain the existing flat topography of the site, but will be graded to ensure that all stormwater runoff from the site is directed towards the bioretention planters and away from adjacent properties. (h) Guideline 4.224: … Runoff generated by the proposed site development must be disposed of in a manner which will not affect adjacent properties. See disucssion under Finding 3(g) above.
(i) Guideline 4.240: All development proposals shall provide emergency access as required by the [Contra Costa County] Fire [Protection] District. The CCCFPD has reviewed the Project plans and determined that it complies with emergency access requirements. The CCCFPD will conduct a full review prior to issuance of engineering or building permits. (j) Guideline 4.280: Exterior lighting shall be designed to coordinate with the building and landscape architecture. Building-mounted fixtures shall be compatible with the building facades.

Overall lighting levels shall be consistent with the character and intensity of existing lighting in the area surrounding the project site. Location of perimeter lights shall ensure that light is directed downward and not over property lines. The proposed lighting fixtures are appropriate to the architectural theme of the Project and will be subject to the City’s standard conditions, which prohibit light trespass onto adjacent properties.
(k) Guideline 4.281: Maximum height of pole-mounted fixtures shall be generally consistent with the allowable height of accessory structures (maximum 16 feet). The type of light fixture shall be suitable for the use it serves; e.g. bollard lights along pedestrian walks, pole-mounted lights for parking areas, spotlight for accents, etc. In addition to the façade-mounted fixtures to illuminate front yards, the Project will also provide eight pole-mounted fixtures along the internal streets that are 14 feet in height
Section 12. Tree Removal Permit

1. The tree removal is consistent with the provisions of CDC Chapter 18.310, Tree

Res. No. 23-XX 22
Preservation and Protection, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 12 of the trees located on the site are classified as “protected” (four because of their species and size, eight because of size only). The Protected Trees include one coast live oak (tree #96), three valley oaks (trees #103 and #107, and #108), six black walnuts (trees #75, #89, #91, #98, #100, and #102), one Italian cypress (tree #86), and one almond (#99). The Protected Trees on the subject property are proposed for removal due to their proximity to proposed structures or hardscape, and/or their poor health. The Project’s 70 replacement trees exceed the Development Code’s minimum requirement of three replacement trees for every one tree removed by 34. Per CDC Section 18.310.060.B.4, the proposed replacement trees do not include required street trees.

2. The tree removal is consistent with the following evaluation and removal criteria in Sections 18.310.070 (A) and (B).
(a) The extent of proposed building or development activity that does not require the removal of protected trees, relative to the extent of proposed building or development activity that requires such removal. Based on the grading, drainage, site plan, and health of the trees, the 12 Protected Trees on the site need to be removed due to encroachment of the proposed development and/or the health of the trees. The Project site is fairly small, and accounting for the improvements necessary for the development and the proposed homes does not allow for preservation of the Protected Trees. (b) Design features of the project in comparison with other existing or approved projects in Concord that have (or had) protected trees on their sites. Features such as the streetscape and landscaping of the Project are similar to other existing and approved residential subdivisions in Concord that have required the removal of Protected Trees to accommodate roadways, utilities, and homes. In this case, all of the Protected Trees identified for removal are located in areas proposed for public/private improvements (including utilities) and/or building footprints. (c) Factors that are unique to the site, such as topographic constraints, lot configuration and physical limitations. The proposed lot configuration and buildout in accordance with the allowable

Res. No. 23-XX 23
project density requires the removal of the Protected Trees because they conflict with proposed public/private improvements and building footprints.
(d) The overall health and structural condition of the potentially impacted protected trees. All but four of the Protected Trees on the site are classified as being in “low,” “declining,” or “dead” condition.
(e) The approximate age of each protected tree compared with the average life span for each species. According to the arborist’s report, four of the 12 Protected Trees proposed for removal, all black walnuts, are in a declining state. The potential lifespan for trees in a state of decline is more limited, and the likelihood of death is much greater. One Protected Tree proposed for removal, a black walnut, is already dead. Black walnut trees are noted to have a life expectancy of more than 250 years.

The other trees, including the three valley oaks, the coast live oak, a black walnut, an Italian cypress, and an almond tree, are all noted to be in either “low” or “good” condition. Both varieties of oak can have a lifespan of almost 300 years, and the almond a lifespan of 30 years. However, as noted in Findings (a) and (h), these trees must be removed to accommodate the development, and there are no feasible alternatives for their preservation.
(f) The number of healthy, protected trees that the site will support, with and without the proposed development. The site contains a total of four healthy Protected Trees which must be removed to accommodate the Project. The Project has proposed 70 replacement trees, which exceeds the Development Code’s minimum requirement of three replacement trees for every one tree removed by 34 trees.
(g) The effect of tree removal on soil stability/erosion, particularly near watercourses or on steep slopes. There are no watercourses on or adjacent to the Project site. The proposed conditions of approval would address any soil stability/erosion issues that may result from the proposed tree removal.
(h) Whether any alternatives would allow for preservation of the protected tree. Staff was unable to identify any feasible alternatives that would preserve additional Protected Trees while

Res. No. 23-XX 24
allowing 14 detached single-family homes with similar lot sizes and the associated improvements necessary to serve the Project.
(i) The age of the protected tree(s) with regard to whether removal would encourage healthier, more vigorous growth of younger similar trees in the area. Even if preservation of the Protected Trees were feasible, their anticipated lifespan would be diminished when surrounded by development. The replacement trees would be appropriately located and planted to encourage their vigorous growth as younger similar trees in the area.
(j) The number of existing protected trees in the area and the effect of removal on the public health, safety, and general welfare of the area. In general, the area surrounding the Project site is developed with both large lots that allow for a large number of existing Protected Trees, and smaller lots that do not. No trees on any adjacent properties are proposed for removal in conjunction with the proposed development. Therefore, removal of the Protected Trees on the Project site would not substantially diminish the overall tree density in the Project area. (k) The potential for the protected tree to become a public nuisance or interfere with utility service(s) and existing structures. If preserved, the Protected Trees would likely interfere with the proposed access by emergency personnel and the installation of private improvements to serve the Project, and the trees themselves would be impacted and endangered by on-site construction. (l) Present and future shade potential with regard to solar heating and cooling. Although the Protected Trees at the Project site currently offer shade, this is not guaranteed for the long-term because of health or structural issues identified in the arborist report. Appropriately planted and maintained replacement trees, specifically the red maples and southern magnolias, would be sited to provide solar cooling during the summer by shading south- and west-facing windows, with deciduous species selected to provide solar heating of these windows in the winter.

3. Measures have been incorporated into the project or permit to mitigate impacts to remaining trees or to replace the trees that have been removed. A total of 70 replacement trees will be provided, which exceeds the Development Code requirement of three new replacement trees for each

Res. No. 23-XX 25
Protected Tree to be removed (36 replacement trees required) by 34 trees.

Section 13. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Concord on October 24, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers -
NOES: Councilmembers -
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers -
ABSENT: Councilmembers -
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 23-XX was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Concord on October 24, 2023.

Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Susanne Meyer Brown
City Attorney
Attachments: Exhibit A – Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report Exhibit B – Conditions of Approval

1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report
prepared by
City of Concord
Community Development Department
1950 Parkside Drive, MS/53
Concord, California 94519
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street 303
Oakland, California 94612
June 2023

1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report
prepared by
City of Concord
Community Development Department
1950 Parkside Drive, MS/53
Concord, California 94519
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street, Suite 303
Oakland, California 94612
June 2023

This report prepared on 50% recycled paper with 50% post-consumer content.

Table of Contents
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 2 3 Existing Site Conditions................................................................................................................... 8 4 Consistency Analysis.....................................................................................................................11

4.1 Criterion (a).......................................................................................................................11

4.2 Criterion (b).......................................................................................................................11

4.3 Criterion (c) .......................................................................................................................11

4.4 Criterion (d).......................................................................................................................12

4.4.1 Traffic................................................................................................................12

4.4.2 Noise .................................................................................................................13

4.4.3 Air Quality .........................................................................................................18

4.4.4 Hydrology and Water Quality ...........................................................................21

4.4.5 Utilities and Public Services..............................................................................22

4.5 Exceptions to the Exemption ............................................................................................23

4.5.1 Cumulative Impacts Criterion...........................................................................23

4.5.2 Significant Effect due to Unusual Circumstances.............................................23

4.5.3 Scenic Highways................................................................................................23

4.5.4 Hazardous Waste Sites .....................................................................................24

4.5.5 Historical Resources..........................................................................................24 5 Summary.......................................................................................................................................26 6 References ....................................................................................................................................27 Tables
Table 1 Project Characteristics....................................................................................................... 7 Table 2 AASHTO Maximum Vibration Levels for Preventing Damage .........................................16 Table 3 Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria ..........................................................................16 Table 4 Vibration Levels Measured during Construction Activities.............................................17 Table 5 HVAC Noise Assessment..................................................................................................18 Table 6 BAAQMD Air Quality Thresholds of Significance.............................................................19 Table 7 Construction Emissions...................................................................................................20 Table 8 Trip Generation ...............................................................................................................20 Table 9 Operational Emissions.....................................................................................................21

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
ii
Figures
Figure 1 Regional Project Location.................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2 Project Site Location.......................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan............................................................................................................. 5 Figure 4 Proposed Building Renderings .......................................................................................... 6 Figure 5 Photographs of the Project Site ........................................................................................ 8 Appendices
Appendix A Arborist Report
Appendix B California Emissions Estimator Model Results Appendix C Roadway Construction Noise Model Results
Appendix D Stormwater Control Plan
Appendix E Archeological and Historic Resources Assessment

Introduction
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 1
1 Introduction
This report serves as the technical documentation of an environmental analysis performed by Rincon Consultants, Inc. for the 1836 Clayton Way residential subdivision in the City of Concord. The intent of the analysis is to document whether the project is eligible for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption (CE). The report provides an introduction, project description, and evaluation of the project’s consistency with the requirements for a Class 32 exemption. This includes an analysis of the project’s potential impacts in the areas of biological resources, traffic, air quality, noise, water quality, and historic resources. The report concludes that the project is eligible for a Class 32 CE.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 states that a Class 32 CE is allowed when:
a. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. b. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 outlines exceptions to the applicability of a CE, including cumulative impacts, significant effects due to unusual circumstances, scenic highways, hazardous waste sites, and historical resources. A full listing of these exceptions and an assessment of their applicability to the proposed project is provided in this report. Rincon Consultants, Inc. evaluated the project’s consistency with the Class 32 criteria and the exceptions to the applicability of a CE to confirm the project’s eligibility for the Class 32 exemption.

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
2 2 Project Description
The project site encompasses 1.67 acres or approximately 73,008 square feet and is located at 1836 Clayton Way in the City of Concord in Contra Costa County on assessor’s parcel number (APN) 114- 220-019. The site is on the northeast side of Clayton Way between Wren Court and Kevin Place.

Existing conditions on the site are described in Section 3 of this report. Figure 1 shows the regional location of the project site and Figure 2 shows the project site’s location in its local context.

The proposed project would involve subdivision of the subject parcel into 14 lots and the construction of a single-family residence on each lot, 13 of which would be for sale and one of which would be an affordable dwelling unit restricted to very low-income individuals. The affordable unit represents approximately 7.7 percent of the “base density” of 13 units. Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, this qualifies the project for a one-unit density bonus (for a total of 14 units), waivers of requirements for minimum lot depth, open space, interior sidewalk, maximum lot coverage, and minimum tree sizes, and a concession granting relief from undergrounding of utility lines. Figure 3 shows the proposed site plan.

The proposed residences would be built in three architectural styles: Craftsman, European Cottage, and Farmhouse. Figure 4 shows the proposed building renderings for each building type. The proposed single-family residences would be two stories with a maximum height of 30 feet. shows the building elevation for each proposed building design. Construction of the 14 new residences would require demolition of the existing vacant single-family residence on the parcel.

The project site would be accessible via Buttonwood Lane, a proposed new private roadway extending into the site from Clayton Way, located along the northwest property line. There would be two private courts extending from the proposed Buttonwood Lane to allow access to the proposed residences in the eastern portion of the site.

Table 1 shows the characteristics of the proposed project.

Project Description
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 3
Figure 1 Regional Project Location

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
4 Figure 2 Project Site Location

Project Description
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 5
Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
6 Figure 4 Proposed Building Renderings

Project Description
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 7
Table 1 Project Characteristics
Descriptions
Address 1836 Clayton Way
Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 114-220-019
Lot Area 1.67 acres (73,008 SF)
Floor Area1 Residence 1: 2,626 SF
Residence 2: 2,483 SF
Residence 3: 2,626 SF
Residence 4: 2,483 SF
Residence 5: 2,626 SF
Residence 6: 1,618 SF
Residence 7: 1,637 SF
Residence 8: 1,637 SF
Residence 9: 1,618 SF
Residence 10: 2,483 SF
Residence 11: 2,626 SF
Residence 12: 2,483 SF
Residence 13: 2,626 SF
Residence 14: 2,483 SF
Total: 32,055 gross SF
Maximum Building Height 30 feet
Units 4-bedroom: 14 units
FAR 10.33
Parking 35 spaces
SF = square feet; FAR = floor area ratio
1 The total floor area does not include garages, porches, or decks.

The project would include various landscaping elements, including large canopy trees along Clayton Way as well as screening trees around the rear property lines of the proposed lots. Low ornamental grasses would be planted along the parkway strip. Deciduous canopy trees would be planted along the proposed Buttonwood Lane. Low water use plants would be incorporated throughout front yards. Shrub rows would be incorporated between properties along driveways. The project would require the removal of 51 trees, 12 of which are considered protected under the Concord Municipal Code. Approximately 15 existing trees would remain off-site along the boundary of the property.

Flow-through planters to capture water from impervious areas on the site would be added at four different locations. Flow-through planters are structures with impervious bottoms that are filled with soil and vegetation which would allow stormwater to infiltrate through the soil before being discharged. Additionally, bioretention would be incorporated throughout the project site. The total landscaped area would be 14,893 square feet. A mailbox unit would be located in the northern corner of the project site.

Project construction would occur over approximately 11 months with the following estimated timeframes: seven days for demolition; 15 days for site preparation; 10 days for grading; eight months for building construction; and five days for asphalt paving.

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
8 3 Existing Site Conditions
The project site encompasses 1.67 acres or approximately 73,008 square feet and is located at 1836 Clayton Way in the City of Concord, Contra Costa County. The project site is located approximately

1.4 miles east of downtown Concord. The parcel (APN 114-220-019) is zoned single-family residential (RS-10) and has a 2030 General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (LDR).

The project is bounded by Clayton Way to the south and single-family residential development to the west, north, and east. Residences adjacent to the project site consist of one- and two-story buildings. The project site is accessible via Clayton Way at the southern end of the property by a gravel driveway. The project site has been previously developed and contains an existing vacant single-family residence and two accessory buildings located at the southern portion of the site. The project site is relatively flat and formerly served as an orchard. Currently there are 51 trees, including four native trees as well as remnant orchard trees, on the project site. Figure 5 shows images of the project site.

Figure 5 Photographs of the Project Site
Photograph 1. The project site frontage, looking southeast from Clayton Way.

Existing Site Conditions
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 9
Photograph 2. The rear of the project site, looking north from the site interior.

Photograph 3. The rear of the project site, looking east from the site interior.

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
10 Photograph 4. Back view of the existing residence and garage facing south.

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 11
4 Consistency Analysis

4.1 Criterion (a)
The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

According to the City of Concord General Plan Land Use Map, the project site is designated for low density residential uses. The project site is zoned RS-10, Single Family Residential. Pursuant to the City of Concord Municipal Code (CMC) Section 18.30.010, the RS-10 zone permits “densities of two and one-half to 10 units per net acre.” The proposed project would consist of single-family residential development and would result in a base density of approximately 9.59 units per acre, with a state density bonus of 0.7 units per acre, which is considered to be consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning standards pursuant to State Density Bonus Law. The City of Concord has determined that the proposed project would be consistent with the CMC and Concord General Plan pursuant to Sections L and M of the July 5, 2023 Staff Report.

The project would be consistent with the applicable General Plan land use designation, General Plan policies, zoning designation, and regulations. Therefore, the project would meet the requirements of criterion (a)

4.2 Criterion (b)
The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

The project site is a 1.67-acre parcel in a developed suburban neighborhood within Concord city limits. It is immediately surrounded by urban uses on all sides. Therefore, the project would meet the requirements of criterion (b).

4.3 Criterion (c)
The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

The project site is located within a highly developed urban area that lacks habitat that would be suitable for sensitive animal or plant species. The project site is developed with a single-family residence and gravel driveway. According to the arborist report for the project prepared by Atlas Tree Service, Inc on November 8, 2022 (Appendix A), trees growing on the project site include nine almond trees, six Italian cypress, one olive tree, three Chinese pistache, one southern magnolia, 17 black walnuts, two locust, three wild plums, one English walnut, three glossy privets, one persimmon, one native coast live oak, and three native valley oaks.

A search of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system concluded that the project site does not contain critical habitats (USFWS 2021a). The USFWS national wetlands inventory did not identify wetland or riparian habitat on or around the project site (USFWS 2021b). Additionally, the project site does not contain special‐status plant and wildlife taxa recognized on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2021) and the California Department of Fish and

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
12 Wildlife (CDFW) State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, And Rare Plants of California (CDFW 2021). The project site is located within a developed area that lacks habitat that would be suitable for sensitive animal or plant species.

Due to the developed nature of the project site and surrounding areas, there would be little potential for wildlife movement. The project site does not have value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species and would not impact endangered, rare, or threatened species.

Therefore, the proposed project would meet the requirements of criterion (c).

4.4 Criterion (d)
Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

The following discussion provides an analysis of the project’s potential effects with respect to traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality.

4.4.1 Traffic
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Pursuant to Senate Bill 743, transportation and traffic impacts should be measured using Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) instead of the previously used Level of Service (LOS) (Office of Planning and Research 2013). Reducing VMT is an effective climate strategy and is intended to decrease greenhouse gas emissions associated with the transportation sector while increasing benefits to human health.

The Concord City Council has adopted Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening and Significance Thresholds based on the California Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) recommended VMT thresholds. Under the City’s VMT Screening Criteria, a residential project is presumed to result in less than significant VMT impacts if it has fewer than 20 units. The proposed project would involve the construction of 14 units and would therefore have a less than significant VMT impact.

Site Access
Residences would be accessed via Buttonwood Lane, a new proposed 20-foot wide private road accessed via a 24-foot wide driveway on Clayton Way at the property’s southern boundary. The site would have two private 20-foot wide courts extending from proposed Buttonwood Lane to provide access to residences in the eastern portion of the site. The City’s traffic engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and confirmed that they meet the City’s standards. Therefore, there would be adequate site access.

Construction Traffic
Construction traffic impacts could be significant if the project would create a prolonged impact due to lane closure; impede emergency vehicle access; create traffic hazards to bicycles and/or pedestrians; or result in similar substantial impediments to circulation or safety. Based on the following assumptions, it is not anticipated that project construction would cause significant traffic impacts.

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 13
As conditioned, construction hours would be limited to 7:30 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Construction on Saturdays may be allowed only upon prior approval by the Building, Engineering, and Planning Divisions. Buildout of the proposed project would not involve road closures that would significantly affect emergency vehicle access or create significant hazards to bicycles and pedestrians.

It is anticipated that the construction vehicles, haul trucks, and construction workers would travel along Concord Boulevard and Clayton Way. Concord Boulevard is an approved truck route. Clayton Way is not an approved truck route but can be accessed for the purposes of loading or unloading (CMC 10.25.010). The applicant’s proposed construction schedule has been estimated as follows: 7 days for demolition; 15 days for site preparation; 10 days for grading; 8 months for building construction; and 5 days for asphalt paving. During the proposed 17 days of grading and demolition, there would be approximately one round-trip haul trip per day, or up to two trips per day if grading and hauling were concentrated in half of that period. Assuming a maximum of two trips are spread out over a 10-hour construction day (7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. in accordance with the CMC), less than one trip would occur per hour. If only one truck traveled to or from the project site in any given hour, construction trucks would not significantly disrupt the flow of traffic on Concord Boulevard and Clayton Way. Construction trips would generally be staggered throughout the day, with most trips occurring during off-peak hours.

Finally, it should be noted that construction traffic impacts are temporary by their nature and would have no effect on traffic and circulation beyond the construction period.

Conclusion
Based on the assessment of traffic impacts and site access above, there would be no significant impacts related to traffic.

4.4.2 Noise
Noise Characteristics and Measurement
Noise level (or volume) is generally measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A-weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound power levels to be consistent with that of human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (about the highest note on a piano) and less sensitive to low frequencies (below 100 Hertz).

One of the most frequently used noise metrics that considers duration as well as sound power level is the equivalent noise level (Leq). The Leq is defined as the steady A-weighted level that is equivalent to the same amount of energy as that contained in the actual varying levels over a period of time (essentially, Leq is the average sound level).

Noise from lightly traveled roads typically attenuates at a rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from heavily traveled roads typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance, while noise from a point source (such as construction equipment) typically attenuates at about 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise levels may also be reduced by the introduction of intervening structures. For example, a single row of buildings between the receiver and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm that breaks the line-ofsight reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA. The construction style for new buildings in California

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
14 generally provides a reduction of exterior-to-interior noise levels of about 30 dBA with closed windows (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011).

The time period in which noise occurs is also important since noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that which occurs during the day. Community noise is usually measured using Day-Night Average Level (DNL), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a 10-dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours, or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a 5 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a 10 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Noise levels described by DNL and CNEL usually do not differ by more than 1 dBA. In practice, CNEL and DNL are used interchangeably.

Noise Standards
The City of Concord’s 2030 General Plan Safety and Noise Element incorporates comprehensive goals, policies, and actions related to noise and acceptable noise levels. These policies address unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noise levels and sources, such as vehicles, construction, special sources (e.g., radios, musical instrument, animals) and stationary sources (e.g., heating and cooling systems, mechanical rooms). The following policies and actions in the Environmental Hazards Element would apply to the proposed project’s noise impacts:
 Policy S-2.2.4: Require new noise sources to use best available control technology (BACT) to minimize noise emissions.
 Policy S-2.2.5: Require developers to reduce the noise impacts of new development on adjacent properties through appropriate means.

Section 18.150.130 of the CMC states that all noise emanating from a site must comply with the noise standards of the General Plan Safety and Noise Element, with the exception of construction activities. CMC Section 8.25.020(y) exempts site preparation and construction activities between the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays (except on holidays) or as approved by the City as part of a planning permit.

For traffic-related noise, impacts would be significant if project-generated traffic results in the exposure of sensitive receivers to a perceptible increase in roadway noise. Roughly a doubling of traffic volume would be necessary to generate a perceptible increase in roadway noise levels of 3 dBA or more (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018).

Existing Ambient Noise Levels
The primary source of noise in the vicinity of the project site is motor vehicle traffic, including automobiles, trucks, buses, and motorcycles. Among area roadways, Clayton Way produces noise from vehicles associated with the surrounding neighborhood. Secondary sources of roadway noise include traffic on Concord Boulevard. While typical activities such as conversations may occur at nearby residences, traffic is the main contributor to existing ambient noise levels.

Construction Noise
Construction of the project would have the potential to create excessive noise levels above ambient noise conditions and City of Concord standards on a temporary basis. The project would result in temporary noise level increases during site preparation, excavation, paving, building construction, and architectural coating activities. Each phase of construction has a specific equipment mix and

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 15
associated noise characteristics, depending on the equipment used during that phase. Construction noise would typically be higher during the more equipment-intensive phases of initial construction (i.e., site preparation and grading work) and would be lower during the later construction phases (i.e., building construction and paving). Construction noise was estimated using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2006). RCNM predicts construction noise levels for a variety of construction operations based on empirical data and the application of acoustical propagation formulas. RCNM provides reference noise levels for standard construction equipment, with an attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance for stationary equipment.

Construction activities would be located as close as 21 feet to the nearest sensitive receivers (adjacent single-family residences) to the west but would typically be located at an average distance further away from these receivers due to the dynamic nature of construction. Construction equipment is typically dispersed in various areas of the sites, with only a limited amount of equipment operating near a given location at a particular time. The FTA 2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment document recommends evaluating construction noise impacts from the center of the construction site on page 177, stating that the distance variable in its recommended construction noise calculation “assumes that all equipment operates at the center of the project.” Therefore, it is common, industry-standard practice to analyze average construction noise from the center of the site because this is the approximate center of where noise would be generated as equipment moves around the site throughout the workday. In accordance with this FTA recommended methodology, construction noise during each phase of construction was analyzed at an average distance of 100 feet, which is the distance from the center of the project site to the nearest sensitive receiver. Construction noise levels over an 8-hour construction day were estimated to be approximately 79 dBA Leq at a distance of 100 feet (RCNM calculations are included in Appendix C).

Pursuant to CMC Section 8.25.020(y) noise generated by construction activities is exempt from compliance with the noise level limits contained in the City’s General Plan if the project construction activities occur between the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. As conditioned, construction hours would be limited to 7:30 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Construction on Saturdays may be allowed only upon prior approval by the Building, Engineering, and Planning Divisions. For purposes of analyzing impacts from this project, the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018) criteria were used. The FTA provides reasonable criteria for assessing construction noise impacts based on the potential for adverse community reaction. For residential uses, the daytime noise threshold is 80 dBA Leq, for an 8-hour period (FTA 2018). Project construction would be as loud as 79 dBA Leq at a distance of 100 feet. Therefore, noise associated with project construction would not exceed the daytime construction noise threshold for residential land uses of 80 dBA Leq.

Construction Vibration
Groundborne vibration of concern in environmental analysis consists of the oscillatory waves that move from a source through the ground to adjacent buildings or structures and vibration energy may propagate through the buildings or structures. Vibration may be felt, may manifest as an audible low-frequency rumbling noise (referred to as groundborne noise), and may cause windows, items on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle (Caltrans 2020). Although groundborne vibration is sometimes noticeable in outdoor environments, it is almost never annoying to people who are

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
16 outdoors. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants at vibration-sensitive land uses and may cause structural damage.

Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by manmade activities attenuates rapidly as distance from the source of the vibration increases. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or root mean squared (RMS) vibration velocity. The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is often used as it corresponds to the stresses that are experienced by buildings (Caltrans 2020).

High levels of groundborne vibration may cause damage to nearby building or structures; at lower levels, groundborne vibration may cause minor cosmetic (i.e., non-structural damage) such as cracks. These vibration levels are nearly exclusively associated with high impact activities such as blasting, pile-driving, vibratory compaction, demolition, drilling, or excavation. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has determined vibration levels with potential to damage nearby buildings and structures; these levels are identified in Table 2.

Table 2 AASHTO Maximum Vibration Levels for Preventing Damage Type of Situation Limiting Velocity (in/sec)
Historic sites or other critical locations 0.1
Residential buildings, plastered walls 0.2–0.3
Residential buildings in good repair with gypsum board walls 0.4–0.5 Engineered structures, without plaster 1.0–1.5
in/sec = inches per second
Source: Caltrans 2020
Section 18.150.130(F) of the CMC states that vibrational activities, such as those from construction, that are perceptible without instruments at the property line of a subject site are not permitted.

Numerous studies have been conducted to characterize the human response to vibration. The vibration annoyance potential criteria recommended for use by Caltrans, which are based on the general human response to different levels of groundborne vibration velocity levels, are described in Table 3. Based on Caltrans recommendations, limiting vibration levels to below 0.3 in/sec PPV for older residential structures would prevent architectural damage. Additionally, limiting vibration levels to below 0.04 in/sec PPV would prevent human annoyance in most cases, based on Caltrans recommendations (Caltrans 2020).

Table 3 Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria
Human Response
Vibration Level (in/sec PPV)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources1 Severe 2.0 0.4
Strongly perceptible 0.9 0.10
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
in/sec = inches per second; PPV = peak particle velocity 1 Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

Source: Caltrans 2020

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 17
Construction activities have the greatest potential to generate ground-borne vibration affecting nearby receivers, especially during grading and excavation of the project site. Neither blasting nor pile driving would be required for project construction. Construction vibration estimates are based on vibration levels reported by Caltrans and the FTA (Caltrans 2020, FTA 2018). Table 4 shows typical vibration levels for various pieces of construction equipment used in the assessment of construction vibration.

Table 4 Vibration Levels Measured during Construction Activities Equipment PPV at 25 feet (in/sec)
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Small Bulldozer 0.003
in/sec = inches per second; PPV = peak particle velocity Source: FTA 2018
The greatest anticipated source of vibration during general project construction activities would be from a large bulldozer, which would create approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet.

A loaded truck and small bulldozer would create approximately 0.076 in/sec PPV and 0.003 in/sec PPV, respectively, at a distance of 25 feet (Caltrans 2020). These vibration levels are all lower than the potential annoyance threshold of 0.04 in/sec PPV and the residential structures architectural damage threshold of 0.3 in/sec PPV. Therefore, temporary vibration impacts associated with construction activities would be less than significant. Construction activities that generates loud noises (and therefore vibration) would also be limited to daytime hours on weekdays and weekends, which would prevent the exposure of sensitive receivers to vibration during evening and nighttime hours. As a result, it would not result in substantial annoyance to people of normal sensitivity. In addition, the vibration level would not exceed the Caltrans’ recommended criterion of

0.1 in/sec PPV for potential damage of historic and old buildings from vibration sources.

The project does not include substantial vibration sources associated with operation. Therefore, operational impacts of vibration on people and structures would be less than significant.

Operational Noise
Existing uses near the project site may periodically be subject to noises associated with operation of the proposed project, including noise that is typical of residential development such as conversations, music, trash hauling, and noise associated with ventilation and heating systems. For example, outdoor conversations may potentially be heard at adjacent residences. However, this activity would not substantially contribute to average ambient noise levels and would be comparable to similar activity at the existing residential uses on surrounding properties.

Each building would have heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units at the ground floor level for each unit. The HVAC equipment could operate 24 hours per day and would generate noise levels of approximately 72 dBA Leq at 5 feet based on standard specifications. Table 5 shows the hourly noise level generated by HVAC units at the nearest property line. Assuming that the equipment operates for a period of 24 hours, the resulting daily noise level would be 57 dBA Ldn which is below the “normally acceptable” land-use compatibility guideline of 60 dBA.

Therefore, noise levels generated from on-site HVAC equipment would be less than significant.

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
18 Table 5 HVAC Noise Assessment
Land Use
Reference
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Reference
Distance
(ft)
Distance
(ft)
Distance
Attenuation
(dBA)
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Residential 72 5 20 15 57
In addition, the proposed project would generate traffic noise from vehicles traveling to and from the project site. As shown in , the proposed project would generate approximately 132 average daily trips, with 11 AM peak hour trips and 14 PM peak hour trips. Roughly, a doubling of traffic volume would be necessary to generate a perceptible increase in roadway noise levels of 3 dBA or more.

Currently, Clayton Way has average daily traffic of 1,300 trips and provides access to hundreds of single-family residences and a connection between Concord Boulevard and Willow Pass Road. The addition of 132 trips to Clayton Way would not double existing traffic on the roadway. Therefore, the minimal amount of traffic generated by the proposed project relative to existing traffic volumes on local roadways would not result in a perceptible increase in roadway noise.

Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in a significant long-term increase in traffic noise levels, and temporary construction noise would be less than significant, based on compliance with FTA criteria regarding construction noise and the City’s time restrictions on construction activities, contained in the CMC. The project’s operational noise would be similar to noise from other nearby residences and HVAC equipment would create noise levels below the “normally acceptable” compatibility guideline. Operational impacts would be less than significant in the context of the existing noise in the surrounding area. Therefore, noise-related impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant.

4.4.3 Air Quality
A significant adverse air quality impact may occur when a project individually or cumulatively interferes with progress toward the attainment of the ozone standard by releasing emissions that equal or exceed the established long-term quantitative thresholds for pollutants or causes an exceedance of a state or federal ambient air quality standard for any criteria pollutant. Primary criteria pollutants are emitted directly from a source (e.g., vehicle tailpipe, an exhaust stack of a factory, etc.) into the atmosphere. Commonly found primary criteria pollutants include reactive organic gases (ROG), nitric oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). PM 10 is particulate matter measuring no more than 10 microns in diameter, while PM2.5 is fine particulate matter measuring no more than 2.5 microns in diameter.

Significance Thresholds
Because the project site is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) and falls under the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), this air quality analysis conforms to the methodologies recommended in the BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD 2022).

BAAQMD has developed screening criteria where projects would have less than significant impacts from criteria air pollutant emissions if they are below a certain development size (BAAQMD 2022).

For single-family residences, the construction screening criteria is 254 dwelling units and operational

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 19
screening criteria is 421 dwelling units. For a project to meet the screening criteria for construction, it cannot include any of the following activities during construction:
 Demolition;
 Simultaneous occurrence of more than two construction phases (e.g., paving and building construction would occur simultaneously);
 Simultaneous construction of more than one land use type (e.g., project would develop residential and commercial uses on the same site) (not applicable to high density infill development);
 Extensive site preparation (i.e., greater than default assumptions used by the Urban Land Use Emissions Model [URBEMIS] for grading, cut/fill, or earth movement); or  Extensive material transport (e.g., greater than 10,000 cubic yards of soil import/export) requiring a considerable amount of haul truck activity.

The project requires demolition and thus would not meet the screening criteria for construction. For projects that do not meet the screening criteria, it is recommended that emissions be quantified and compared to emissions thresholds. The following significance thresholds have been recommended by BAAQMD for construction-related air quality impacts and project operationrelated air quality impacts. For the purposes of this analysis, the project would result in a significant impact if construction or operational emissions would exceed any of the thresholds shown in Table 6.

Table 6 BAAQMD Air Quality Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant/Precursor
Construction: Average Daily
Emissions (lbs/day)
Operation: Average Daily
Emissions (lbs/day)
Operation: Maximum
Annual Emissions (tpy)
ROG 54 54 10
NOX 54 54 10
PM10 82 (exhaust) 82 15
PM2.5 54 (exhaust) 54 10
lbs/day = pounds per day; tpy = tons per year; ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less.; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less
Source: BAAQMD 2017, Table 2-2
Methodology
Since the proposed project would involve the demolition of existing structures on the project site, specifically a residential building, a garage, and a storage unit, the BAAQMD construction screening criteria would not apply to this project. Air pollutant emissions generated by project construction and operation were thus estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1. CalEEMod uses project-specific information, including the project’s land uses, square footages for different uses (e.g., residential, commercial, townhouses), and location, to model a project’s construction and operational emissions. The analysis reflects the construction and operation of the project as described under Project Description.

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
20 Construction Emissions
Development of the proposed project would involve site grading, excavation, new building construction, and other construction-related activities that have the potential to generate substantial air pollutant emissions. Temporary construction emissions from these activities were estimated using CalEEMod, based on the gross amount of proposed new residential space. Table 7 shows the maximum daily construction emissions.

Table 7 Construction Emissions
Year
Maximum Daily Emissions
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 SOX
2023 4.22 40.6 36.0 1.90 1.75 <0.1
2024 2.39 21.4 21.6 <1 <1 <0.1
BAAQMD Thresholds 54 54 N/A 82 54 N/A
Threshold Exceeded? No No N/A No No N/A
N/A = not applicable; lbs/day = pounds per day; ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; CO = Carbon Monoxide; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less; PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less; SOx = oxides of sulfur No BAAQMD threshold for CO or SOX
See Appendix A for CalEEMod worksheets; emission data presented is the highest of winter or summer outputs.

Operational Emissions
Long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project are those associated with vehicle trips (mobile emissions), the use of natural gas and electricity (energy), and consumer products and architectural coatings (area source emissions) upon buildout of the project. As shown in Table 8, the project is expected to generate a gross total of 132 daily trips. These daily trip estimates were used to determine operational air quality impacts.

Table 8 Trip Generation
Land Use Units
Daily Trip Rate
Per Unit
AM Trip Rate
Per Unit
PM Trip Rate
Per Unit
Daily
Trips
AM Peak
Hour Trips
PM Peak
Hour Trips
Single-Family
Detached Housing
14 9.43 0.75 0.99 132 11 14
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 11th Edition, 2021 Total operational emissions are shown in Table 9.

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 21
Table 9 Operational Emissions
Sources
Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 SOX
Emissions 1.33 <1 5.04 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
BAAQMD Thresholds 54 54 N/A 82 54 N/A
Threshold Exceeded? No No N/A No No N/A
N/A = not applicable; lbs/day = pounds per day; ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; CO = Carbon Monoxide; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less; PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less; SOx = oxides of sulfur.

No BAAQMD threshold for CO or SOX
See Appendix A for CalEEMod worksheets; emission data presented is the highest of winter or summer outputs.

Conclusion
Construction and operational emissions would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds for any criteria pollutant and would comply with BAAQMD criteria pollutant thresholds. The proposed project would not result in individually or cumulatively significant impacts to air quality. This impact would be less than significant.

4.4.4 Hydrology and Water Quality
Urban runoff can have a variety of deleterious effects. Oil and grease contain a number of hydrocarbon compounds, some of which are toxic to aquatic organisms at low concentrations.

Heavy metals such as lead, cadmium, and copper are the most common metals found in urban stormwater runoff. These metals can be toxic to aquatic organisms and have the potential to contaminate drinking water supplies. Nutrients from fertilizers, including nitrogen and phosphorous, can result in excessive or accelerated growth of vegetation or algae, resulting in oxygen depletion and additional impaired uses of water.

The project would disturb more than one acre of land; therefore, the project would be required to obtain coverage under the General Permit issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the San Francisco Bay Regional Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB) for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009- DWQ or 2009-0009-DWQ General Permit). The project would also be required to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that complies with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The SWPPP may include best management practices (BMPs) such as scheduling construction activities. BMP implementation would incorporate the local climatic conditions to reduce the risk of runoff or erosion during soil-exposing activities, such as grading during the rainy season. Additionally, projects that are subject to development runoff requirements in the City’s NPDES permit would need to be accompanied by a stormwater control plan that meets the criteria in the most recent version of the Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C. 3.

Guidebook. Pursuant to CMC Section 16.05.090(e), the project would also conform to the requirements of the California Stormwater Quality Association Stormwater (CASQA) Best Management Practices handbook for Construction Activities. Therefore, water quality and hydrology impacts during construction would be less than significant.

The current impervious surface area of the project site is approximately 4,995 square feet. The project would add an additional 39,364 square feet of impervious surface area for a total impervious

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
22 surface area after buildout of 44,359 square feet. In compliance with CMC Section 16.05.050, a Stormwater Control Plan was prepared for the project site by Milani and Associates in January 2023 (Appendix D). The project site is relatively flat and contains soils of low permeability. Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) addresses post-construction stormwater requirements for new development and redevelopment projects that add and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious area. Because the project would add more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surfaces to the project site, it must comply with the C.3 provisions set by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Therefore, the project must meet certain criteria including 1) incorporate site design, source control, and stormwater treatment measures into the project design, 2) minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff and non-stormwater discharge, and 3) minimize increases in runoff flows as compared to pre-development conditions.

The Stormwater Control Plan addresses and meets the criteria of the most recent Contra Costa Clean Water Program, which includes the C.3 provisions set by the SFBRWQCB.

Stormwater runoff that does not infiltrate on site currently enters storm drains on Clayton Way and flows to existing City drainage facilities. The project would integrate flow through planters to treat runoff and infiltrate some runoff prior to discharging it into the City’s storm drain. Runoff from each lot, including roofs and paved area, would be routed to a flow through planter located on each lot.

Additionally, the project would utilize bioretention throughout the site to treat impervious areas.

The project landscape plans are designed to minimize runoff and irrigation needs, including low water use plants, pest resistant plants, and plants appropriate to the climate and soils. Inlets, pipes, and swales conveying water to BMP would be inspected and maintained as part of a BMP Operation and Maintenance Plan as required by CMC Section 16.05.050 in order to meet criteria of Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3. Guidebook. The selection, sizing, and preliminary design of storm water treatment and other control measures in the Stormwater Control Plan meet the requirements of RWQCB Order R2-2015-0049 and operational impacts to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.

Conclusion
The proposed project would increase impermeable surfaces on the site. However, the project would comply with Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook, CMC, and the City’s NPDES permit requirements. Therefore, the impacts related to water quality would be less than significant.

4.4.5 Utilities and Public Services
The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The project would be located in an urban area served by existing public utilities and services. A substantial increase in demand for services or utilities would not occur with implementation of the proposed project. The Contra Costa Water District provides water, the City of Concord provides sewer services, and Mt. Diablo Resource Recovery provides solid waste collection services to the adjacent residential buildings and would provide these services to the proposed project. Other services, including gas and electricity, would also continue to be provided to the project site by existing service providers. Fire protection services are provided by Contra Costa County Fire Protection District’s (CCCFPD) and police protection services are provided by the City of Concord Police Department.

Consistency Analysis
CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report 23
The proposed project would be adequately served by utilities and public services. Therefore, the project would meet the requirements of criterion (e).

4.5 Exceptions to the Exemption
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 outlines exceptions to the applicability of a CE, including cumulative impacts, significant effects due to unusual circumstances, scenic highways, hazardous waste sites, and historical resources. These exceptions are discussed below. As shown, none of the exceptions would apply.

4.5.1 Cumulative Impacts Criterion
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 states that “all exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.” The proposed project would not result in significant environmental impacts and there are no other successive projects of the same type or scale planned on the parcels surrounding the project site that would combine to result in significant environmental impacts. Land to the north, south, west, and east of the site is fully developed with existing residential uses. The nearest proposed project is a small subdivision located along Wren Avenue approximately 0.3 miles southwest of the project site. This project would involve the subdivision of a small lot and construction of three single family residences. Given their nature and size, buildout of the projects would not result in significant cumulative impacts. Therefore, no significant cumulative impact would result from successive projects of the same type in the same place over time. This exception to a CE does not apply to the proposed project.

4.5.2 Significant Effect due to Unusual Circumstances
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 states that “a categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.” As discussed under the Existing Site Conditions section above, the project site has been developed with an existing structure. Additionally, the project would be consistent with the surrounding land uses. As described under Section 4.4, Criterion (d), above, the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, water quality, or utilities and public services, and there are no unusual circumstances at the project site which would exacerbate environmental effects. The project site is generally flat and does not possess characteristics which would qualify as unusual circumstances under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. Therefore, no known circumstances at the project site or related to project operations create a reasonable possibility of significant effects to the environment. This exception would not apply to the project.

4.5.3 Scenic Highways
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 states that a CE “shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway.” The project site is not on or near an officially designated California Scenic Highway (Caltrans 2018). Therefore, this exception to a CE is not applicable to the proposed project.

City of Concord
1836 Clayton Way Residential Project
24 4.5.4 Hazardous Waste Sites
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 states that a CE “shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.” A search of the EnviroStor environmental database and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List was conducted in December 2021. The records review indicated that the project site is not located on a site included on a list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2021). Additionally, a search on the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Geotracker concluded that the project site was not located on a cleanup site. Therefore, this exception does not apply to the project (SWRCB 2021).

4.5.5 Historical Resources
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 states that a CE “shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.” The property is not a designated cultural or historical resource, pursuant to Figure 6-6 of the City’s General Plan. On November 2, 2021 Rincon requested a records search of the project site and a 0.5- mile radius from the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) located at Sonoma State University. The CHRIS records search also included a review of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), the California Points of Historical Interest list, the California Historical Landmarks list, the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility list, and the California Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD). This resulted in no eligible archaeological cultural buildings within 0.5-mile of the project site. Additionally, the BERD did not identify any previously recorded cultural resources within or adjacent to the project site.

On October 26, 2021, Rincon contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), to request a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) at the NAHC. The results of the SLF search were received on November 19, 2021 and were negative. Rincon also conducted a site visit on November 2, 2021 that included a pedestrian survey of the project site. The field survey did not identify any archaeological cultural resources in the project site (Appendix E). Nevertheless, there is still a possibility of encountering unrecorded or isolated resources, which would be less than significant with the application of the following City of Concord Standard Condition of Approval:

In the event an archaeological deposit or human remains be encountered during project subsurface construction activities, all ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology shall be contacted to assess the situation, determine if the deposit qualifies as a historical resource, consult with agencies as appropriate, and make recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. If the deposit is found to be significant (i.e., eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources), the applicant shall be responsible for funding and implementing appropriate mitigation measures. If human remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall also be contacted to complete an assessment. All excavation, analysis, and reburial of Native American human remains shall be done in consultation with the Native American Most Likely Descendent, as identified by the California Native American Heritage Commission.