Agenda packet — El Cerrito City Council, November 15, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

Page 1 of 4 ends

AGENDA

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 15, 2022 – 7:00 p.m.

Members:

Mayor Gabe Quinto
Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Motoyama · Councilmember Janet Abelson Councilmember Paul Fadelli · Councilmember Tessa Rudnick Meeting Location:

Council Chambers, 10890 San Pablo Avenue
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Consistent with the Brown Act as amended by AB 361 (2021), members of the City Council, staff, presenters and the public may participate in-person at the location listed above, or remotely via zoom. In-person attendance will be limited to available seats and designated accessible spaces only (no standing room) with chairs spaced to encourage social distancing. Masks are strongly recommended (full in-person protocols available here.)
Interested individuals can also participate or view the City Council meeting as follows:

1. Cable T.V. Broadcast on KCRT Channel 28

2. Livestream Online at www.el-cerrito.org/CouncilMeetingMaterials

3. Via Zoom (Closed captioning available):
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/81861380240?pwd=WHBtQ055YUdOb2dOQ3ZGbFZlekliZz09 Dial in: 1-408-638-0968 Meeting ID: 818 6138 0240 Password: 051730 Each period for public comment will be announced. Public Comments may be submitted one of the following ways:

1. In-person by submitting a request to speak to the City Clerk.

2. Via Zoom using the “Raise Hand” icon to request to speak. If joining by phone, dial *9 to "raise your hand", and when prompted by the host, *6 to unmute/mute.

3. Via email to [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments – Agenda Item #.

To ensure City Council receives your written comments prior to taking action, they must be received by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. All written comments received by this deadline will be provided to the City Council and posted online in advance of the meeting. Comments received after the deadline will be provided to the City Council and included with supplemental materials after the meeting. No written comments will be read into the record.

Agenda Packet Page 1 of 263

Page 2 of 4 ends

7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL – CONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OR OBSERVATION OF A

MOMENT OF SILENCE

2. TELECONFERENCE AND PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS

3. COUNCIL/STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Reports of closed session, commission appointments and informational reports on matters of general interest which are announced by the City Council and staff.

A. City Council Wall of Fame Ad-Hoc Committee Update

Comments related to items appearing on the Public Hearing or Policy Matter portions of the Agenda will be heard prior to the City Council taking action on each item.

5. ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR
All items on the consent calendar shall be acted upon in one motion, unless a member of the City Council or staff request separate consideration.

A. Approval of Minutes
Action Proposed: Pass a motion to approve the minutes from the meetings of October 18 and November 1, 2022.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management B. Authorize City Council and City Advisory Body Meetings to be Held Via Teleconference Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361) Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution authorizing City Council and City Advisory Body meetings to be held via teleconference for a period of 30 days, and making related findings pursuant to AB 361.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management

6. PRESENTATIONS
Agenda Packet Page 2 of 263

Page 3 of 4 ends

A. Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District Update (MVCD) Action Proposed: Receive and file an overview of the Contra Costa MVCD, as well as information on the current vacancy for El Cerrito representation on the Board of Trustees.

Contact: Nola Woods, Public Affairs Director, MVCD
B. El Cerrito Police Department 2021 in Review
Action Proposed: Receive and file a department update and review of 2021 from the El Cerrito Police Department.

Contact: Paul Keith, Police Chief, Police Department

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update
Notice published 10/25/2022
Action Proposed: 1) Adopt a resolution certifying the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan, adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); 2) Adopt a resolution amending Figure 5: the Land Use & Circulation Map of the El Cerrito General Plan; 3) Adopt a resolution amending the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and 4) Introduce and waive the first reading of an ordinance to rezone properties within the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan area.

Contact: Sean Moss, Planning Manager; Melanie Mintz, Community Development Director, Community Development

8. POLICY MATTERS
A. Budget Amendment for Community Recreation Swimming Pool RePlastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5 Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Adopted Budget and Capital Improvement Program to appropriate $59,850 from the General Fund balance for construction of the Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5.

Contact: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department; Christopher Jones, Recreation Director, Recreation Department
Agenda Packet Page 3 of 263

Page 4 of 4 ends

9. CITY COUNCIL LOCAL & REGIONAL LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS
Mayor and City Council communications regarding local and regional liaison assignments and committee reports.

10. ADJOURN REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.

The City of El Cerrito serves, leads and supports our diverse community by providing exemplary and innovative services, public places and infrastructure, ensuring public safety and creating an economically and environmentally sustainable future.
 Council Meetings can be heard live on FM Radio, KECG – 88.1 and 97.7 FM and viewed live on Cable TV - KCRT- Channel 28. The meetings are rebroadcast on Channel 28 the following Thursday and Monday at 12 noon, except on holidays. Live and On-Demand Webcast of the Council Meetings can be accessed from the City’s website http://www.el-cerrito.org/CouncilMeetingMaterials and is streamed with closed caption. Copies of the agenda bills and other written documentation relating to items of business referred to on the agenda are on file and available for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, at the El Cerrito Library and posted on the City’s website at www.el-cerrito.org prior to the meeting.
 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk, 510-215-4305. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28 CFR

35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
 The Deadline for agenda items and communications is eight days prior to the next meeting by 12 noon, City Clerk’s Office, 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA. Tel: 510-215–4305, email [email protected]
 IF YOU CHALLENGE A DECISION OF THE CITY COUNCIL IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE COUNCIL MEETING.

ACTIONS CHALLENGING CITY COUNCIL DECISIONS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE TIME LIMITATIONS CONTAINED IN CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1094.6.  The City Council believes that late night meetings deter public participation, can affect the Council’s decision-making ability, and can be a burden to staff. City Council Meetings shall be adjourned by 11:00 p.m., unless extended to a specific time determined by a majority of the Council.

Agenda Packet Page 4 of 263
Agenda Item No. 5.A.

EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2022 – 6:00 p.m.

Members:

Mayor Gabe Quinto
Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Motoyama · Councilmember Janet Abelson Councilmember Paul Fadelli · Councilmember Tessa Rudnick Meeting Location:

Hillside Conference Room - 2nd Floor, 10890 San Pablo Avenue El Cerrito, CA 94530
This meeting will not be broadcast or livestreamed online. Interested individuals can participate or view the City Council meeting as follows:

1. In person at the address listed above.

2. Via Zoom (Closed captioning available):
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89607126603?pwd=TjJiZlllNEhUUnNVU094QlFiR1JHUT09 Meeting ID: 896 0712 6603 Password: 695398 Dial in: 1-408-638-0968 Each period for public comment will be announced. Public Comments may be submitted one of the following ways and are limited to items on the special meeting agenda only:

1. In-person by submitting a request to speak to the City Clerk.

2. Via Zoom using the “Raise Hand” icon to request to speak. If joining by phone, dial *9 to "raise your hand", and when prompted by the host, *6 to unmute/mute.

3. Via email to [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Agenda Item #.

To ensure City Council receives your written comments prior to taking action, they must be received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. All written comments received by this deadline will be provided to the City Council and posted online in advance of the meeting. Comments received after the deadline will be provided to the City Council and included with supplemental materials after the meeting. No written comments will be read into the record.
6:00 PM ROLL CALL - CONVENE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Quinto called the meeting to order at 6:04 PM

Page 1 of 2 ends

Consistent with the Brown Act as amended by AB 361 (2021), members of the City Council, staff, presenters and the public may participate in-person at the location listed above, or remotely via zoom. In-person attendance will be limited to available seats and designated accessible spaces only (no standing room) with chairs spaced to encourage social distancing. Masks are strongly recommended.

Agenda Packet Page 5 of 263
Agenda Item No. 5.A.

Present In-Person: Mayor Quinto, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Present Remotely: Councilmember Abelson, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama Absent: None

1. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
All persons wishing to speak should sign up with the City Clerk. Remarks are typically limited to 3 minutes per person and to items on the special meeting agenda only.

2. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency Designated Representatives: Karen Pinkos, City Manager; Shannon Bassi, Senior Human Resources Analyst; Glenn Berkheimer, Labor Negotiator; and Sky Woodruff, City Attorney.

Employee Organizations: United Professional Firefighters Local 1230.

Contact: Sky Woodruff, City Attorney, City Management
The City Council convened into closed session at 6:05 PM. No reportable action.

3. ADJOURN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The special meeting adjourned at 6:38 PM
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the City Council meeting of October 18, 2022 as approved by the El Cerrito City Council.

Holly M. Charléty, MMC, City Clerk

Page 2 of 2 ends

Agenda Packet Page 6 of 263

EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2022 – 7:00 p.m.

Members:

Mayor Gabe Quinto
Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Motoyama · Councilmember Janet Abelson Councilmember Paul Fadelli · Councilmember Tessa Rudnick Meeting Location:

Council Chambers, 10890 San Pablo Avenue
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Interested individuals can also participate or view the City Council meeting as follows:

1. Cable T.V. Broadcast on KCRT Channel 28

2. Livestream Online at www.el-cerrito.org/CouncilMeetingMaterials

3. Via Zoom (Closed captioning available):
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/88543428390?pwd=eEtRUHplNHFjdTROb1o5Vm9TL2Ixdz09 Dial in: 1-408-638-0968 Meeting ID: 885 4342 8390 Password: 547379 Each period for public comment will be announced. Public Comments may be submitted one of the following ways:

1. In-person by submitting a request to speak to the City Clerk.

2. Via Zoom using the “Raise Hand” icon to request to speak. If joining by phone, dial *9 to "raise your hand", and when prompted by the host, *6 to unmute/mute.

3. Via email to [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments – Agenda Item #.

To ensure City Council receives your written comments prior to taking action, they must be received by 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. All written comments received by this deadline will be provided to the City Council and posted online in advance of the meeting. Comments received after the deadline will be provided to the City Council and included with supplemental materials after the meeting. No written comments will be read into the record.
7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL – CONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Page 1 of 9 ends

Page 2 of 9 ends

Mayor Quinto called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM.

Present In-Person: Mayor Quinto, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Present Remotely: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson Absent: None

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OR OBSERVATION OF A

MOMENT OF SILENCE

2. TELECONFERENCE AND PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS

3. COUNCIL/STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Reports of closed session, commission appointments and informational reports on matters of general interest which are announced by the City Council and staff.

City Manager Pinkos - update on local and state emergency, improvement of state auditor ranking, and receipt of State Coastal Conservation Grant; announced Great Shake Out October 20th, October 19th Unity Day, and October 20th Spirit Day.

Mayor Quinto - reported out on 6pm closed session, Mayoral proclamations issued for centenarians Tadashi Yoshii and Theodore Crum; reported on meeting with Make El Cerrito Fire Safe, Nations Giant Hamburger to recognize their 70th anniversary, meeting with Congressman Richie Torres, and members of the Methodist Church.

Councilmember Rudnick - reported on attendance at El Cerrito Folk Music Festival, and El Cerrito Fire Department Badge Pinning ceremony.

Councilmember Fadelli - reported on attendance at El Cerrito Fire Department Badge Pinning ceremony, and Ride Electric and Harvest Festival event in Berkeley.

Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama - reported on attendance at El Cerrito Fire Department Badge Pinning ceremony, and Toastmaster's 40th Anniversary event.

Councilmember Abelson - received plaque from Chamber of Commerce in recognition of work in the city.

Comments related to items appearing on the Public Hearing or Policy Matter portions of the Agenda will be heard prior to the City Council taking action on each item.

Agenda Packet Page 8 of 263

Page 3 of 9 ends

All written comments submitted prior to and during the meeting were posted online as supplemental materials and incorporated into the official meeting record. Written public comments for matters not on the agenda were received from Cordell Hindler.

Oral Public Comments:

John Stashik - commented on status with State Auditor and holiday lights on San Pablo.

Buddy Akacic - spoke regarding work on city advisory body meetings, and request to return to in-person meetings.

Greg Lyman - announced the upcoming Sundar Shadi holiday light display from December 17 - December 26.

Vanessa Warheit - commented on communicating issues with technology, knowing attendees at the meeting, and consent item 5.N. and funding.

5. ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR
All items on the consent calendar shall be acted upon in one motion, unless a member of the City Council or staff request separate consideration.

Moved/Seconded: Councilmember Rudnick/Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama Action: Adopted the Consent Calendar as indicated below. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None
A. Approval of Minutes
Action Proposed: Pass a motion to approve the minutes from the meetings of August 16, September 20, 26, and 27, and October 11, 2022.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved minutes, revising August 16th Council Communication for Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama to read "BART Plaza Open House" B. Code Enforcement Appreciation Week Proclamation
Action Proposed: Pass a motion to approve a proclamation recognizing the second week of October as Code Enforcement Appreciation Week.

Contact: Jennifer Bright, Management Assistant, Community Development Department
Action: Approved proclamation
C. Filipino American History Month Proclamation
Agenda Packet Page 9 of 263

Page 4 of 9 ends

Action Proposed: At the request of Mayor Quinto, approve a proclamation recognizing October 2022 as Filipino American History Month in El Cerrito.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved proclamation
D. National Arts and Humanities Month Proclamation
Action Proposed: Pass a motion to approve a proclamation in support and recognition of October 2022 as National Arts and Humanities Month in El Cerrito.

Contact: Karen Pinkos, City Manager, City Management
Action: Approved proclamation
E. Red Ribbon Week Proclamation
Action Proposed: Pass a motion to approve a proclamation declaring October 23 - 31 as "Red Ribbon Week" and encouraging everyone to participate in drug prevention activities, making a visible statement to support a drug-free life.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved proclamation
F. Toastmasters International Proclamation
Action Proposed: At the request of Councilmember Motoyama, approve a proclamation recognizing Toastmasters International and the El Cerrito Club on its 40th anniversary.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved proclamation
G. Environmental Quality Committee Appointment Recommendation Action Proposed: Approve an Environmental Quality Committee recommendation to appoint Simrun Dhoot to the Environmental Quality Committee, effective November 8, 2022.

Page 5 of 9 ends

H. Financial Advisory Board Recommendation
Action Proposed: Receive and file a recommendation from the Financial Advisory Board regarding General Fund Reserve and surplus allocations.

Contact: Sandra Dalida, Finance Director/City Treasurer Financial Advisory Board (FAB) Chair written comments shared regarding the FAB's recommendation, appreciation for the opportunity, and sharing that the FAB is looking forward to working with the Section 115 Trust work group and proposing additional recommendations in the future.

Action: Received and Filed
I. Committing to Core Principles of Democracy: Free and Fair Elections
Action Proposed: At the request of Mayor Quinto, adopt a resolution committing to the core principles of democracy: free and fair elections.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-75, modifying the NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED clause to read "NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito that the City will continue to support elections that are safe, free and fair, and will work with the Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder-Register to prevent any attempts by any elected officials, candidates, special interest groups, or other actors to undermine the election process, threaten election workers or voters, or disregard the collective will of the voters." J. Authorize City Council and City Advisory Body Meetings to be Held Via Teleconference Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361) Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution authorizing City Council and City Advisory Body meetings to be held via teleconference for a period of 30 days, and making related findings pursuant to AB 361.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-76
K. Consulting Services Agreement with Siegfried Engineering for the Design of the Arlington Park Improvements Project, City Project No.

C3082
Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consulting Services Agreement with Siegfried Engineering to provide design services for the Arlington Park Improvements Project, City Project No. C3082, in an amount not to exceed $64,700.

Agenda Packet Page 11 of 263

Page 6 of 9 ends

Contact: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department; Christopher Jones, Recreation Director, Recreation Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-77
L. Reject Construction Bids for 2022 Slurry Seal Project, City Project No. C3027.23
Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution rejecting all bids submitted for the 2022 Slurry Seal Project, City Project No. C3027.23; and authorizing City staff to amend project scope, if necessary, and rebid the project.

Contact: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-78
M. Construction Contract Award for Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5
Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution approving plans and specifications for the Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5 (Project); rejecting the bid submitted by USA Construction as non-responsive and accepting the bid submitted by Tricon Construction, Inc., DBA Tricon Aquatics (Tricon) for the Project; and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract within the current budget for the Project, contingent on successful negotiations with Tricon for construction of the Project.

Contact: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department; Christopher Jones, Recreation Director, Recreation Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-79
N. Budget Amendment for City Hall Electric Vehicle Charging Station Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Adopted Budget and Capital Improvement Program to appropriate $58,721 from the General Fund balance to replace the electric vehicle (EV) charging station at City Hall.

Contact: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-80
Agenda Packet Page 12 of 263

Page 7 of 9 ends

O. Establish Speed Limits for Ten Speed Zones on Ashbury Avenue, Barrett Avenue, Colusa Avenue, Fairmount Avenue, Lincoln Avenue, Moeser Lane and Sea View Drive
Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution establishing the speed limits for 10 speed zones to allow for enforcement of these limits using radar, lidar and other electronic devices in conformance with State of California requirements.

Contact: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-81

6. PRESENTATIONS
A. Annual Sundar Shadi Garden Club Awards
Action Proposed: Receive and file a brief presentation and acknowledgement of contest winners.

Contact: Pamela Austin, El Cerrito Garden Club Representative Presentation and Discussion: Presenters and staff responded to comments and questions raised by members of the council regarding drought resistant and juniper free displays in El Cerrito.

Action: Received and filed
B. Citizens Street Oversight Committee Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2020-21
Action Proposed: Receive and file the Citizens Street Oversight Committee Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2020-21 to City Council and Citizens of El Cerrito.

Contact: Vanessa Hill, Committee Chair, Citizens Street Oversight Committee; Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Received and filed

7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Adoption of Building Code Updates
Notice published on 10/8/2022
Agenda Packet Page 13 of 263

Page 8 of 9 ends

Action Proposed: Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion 1) Adopt a Resolution which makes findings justifying changes to 2022 California Building Standards Code and 2) Introduce by title, waive the first reading, and set the second hearing for November 1, 2022 which adopts the 2022 California Green Code, Administrative, Building, Fire, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical, Energy, Residential, Existing Building Code, 2021 International Property Maintenance Code, and Related Construction Codes as applicable to all construction within the City of El Cerrito, with local modifications as outlined in the Ordinance.

Contact: Keith Marks, Building Official; Melanie Mintz, Community Development Director, Community Development Department
Presentation and Discussion: Presenters and staff responded to comments and questions raised by members of the council regarding electrification, nuisance abatement process, and local amendments.

Public Hearing: Mayor Quinto opened the public hearing.

Public Comments: All written comments submitted prior to and during the meeting were posted online as supplemental materials and incorporated into the official meeting record. Written public comments on this item were received from Scott Tipping. No oral public comments.

Moved/Seconded: Councilmember Fadelli/Councilmember Rudnick Action: Closed the Public Hearing. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None
Moved/Seconded: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama/Councilmember Abelson Action: Adopted Resolution No. 2022-82 Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None
Moved/Seconded: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama/Councilmember Rudnick Action: Introduce by title, waive the first reading, and set the second hearing for 11/1/2022 for the proposed ordinance Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None

8. POLICY MATTERS

9. CITY COUNCIL LOCAL & REGIONAL LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS
Mayor and City Council communications regarding local and regional liaison assignments and committee reports.

Councilmember Rudnick - reported on attendance at the RecycleMore meeting.

Councilmember Fadelli - reported on attendance at the Contra Costa Transportation Authority meeting.

Agenda Packet Page 14 of 263

Page 9 of 9 ends

10. ADJOURN REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.

The regular meeting adjourned at 8:29 PM.

Gabe Quinto, Mayor
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the City Council meeting of October 18, 2022 as approved by the El Cerrito City Council.

Holly M. Charléty, MMC, City Clerk
Agenda Packet Page 15 of 263

EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 1, 2022 – 6:00 p.m.

Members:

Mayor Gabe Quinto
Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Motoyama · Councilmember Janet Abelson Councilmember Paul Fadelli · Councilmember Tessa Rudnick Meeting Location:

1. In person at the address listed above.

2. Via Zoom (Closed captioning available):
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/81082353047?pwd=L01nR2tSSmVtL2RpNkR5azU4blZkQT09 Meeting ID: 810 8235 3047 Password: 862261 Dial in: 1-408-638-0968 Each period for public comment will be announced. Public Comments may be submitted one of the following ways and are limited to items on the special meeting agenda only:

1. In-person by submitting a request to speak to the City Clerk.

2. Via Zoom using the “Raise Hand” icon to request to speak. If joining by phone, dial *9 to "raise your hand", and when prompted by the host, *6 to unmute/mute.

3. Via email to [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Agenda Item #.

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Packet Page 16 of 263
Present In-Person: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Present Remotely:

Councilmember Abelson Absent: None

None

2. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING

LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Name of case: City of Long Beach v. Monsanto Company, et al. (United States District Court for the Central District of California Case No. 2:16-cv-03493-

FMO-AS)
Contact: Sky Woodruff, City Attorney, City Management
City Council convened to closed session at 6:01 pm. No reportable action.

3. ADJOURN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The special meeting adjourned at 6:53 PM
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the City Council meeting of November 1, 2022 as approved by the El Cerrito City Council.

Holly M. Charléty, MMC, City Clerk

Page 2 of 2 ends

Agenda Packet Page 17 of 263

Page 1 of 8 ends

EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT

MINUTES

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 1, 2022 – 7:00 p.m.

Members:

Mayor Gabe Quinto
Mayor Pro Tem Lisa Motoyama · Councilmember Janet
Abelson Councilmember Paul Fadelli · Councilmember
Tessa Rudnick
Meeting Location:

Council Chambers, 10890 San Pablo
Avenue El Cerrito, CA 94530
Interested individuals can also participate or view the City Council meeting as follows:

1. Cable T.V. Broadcast on KCRT Channel 28

2. Livestream Online at www.el-cerrito.org/CouncilMeetingMaterials

3. Via Zoom (Closed captioning available):
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85498913253?pwd=SmoxNDhDUnJYS2U4Y1dLZmhpdGdIQ T09 Dial in: 1-408-638-0968 Meeting ID: 854 9891 3253 Password: 329268 Each period for public comment will be announced. Public Comments may be submitted one of the following ways:

1. In-person by submitting a request to speak to the City Clerk.

2. Via Zoom using the “Raise Hand” icon to request to speak. If joining by phone, dial *9 to "raise your hand", and when prompted by the host, *6 to unmute/mute.

3. Via email to [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments – Agenda Item #.

Page 2 of 8 ends

7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL – CONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Quinto called the meeting to order at 07:02 PM.

Present In-Person: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem
Motoyama, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember
Rudnick Present Remotely: Councilmember Abelson

Absent: None

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OR OBSERVATION

OF A MOMENT OF SILENCE

2. TELECONFERENCE AND PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS

3. COUNCIL/STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Reports of closed session, commission appointments and informational reports on matters of general interest which are announced by the City Council and staff.

City Manager Pinkos - provided an update on the local emergency, update on public health services, and upcoming changes on delivery method for public meetings.

Mayor Pro Tem - reported on attendance at East Bay division meeting for Cal Cities, Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) Ad-hoc meeting; reminder to vote on November 8th.

Councilmember Rudnick - reported on attendance at East Bay division meeting for Cal Cities, reminder of available COVID vaccines.

Councilmember Abelson - reported on attendance at East Bay division meeting for Cal Cities, reminder of available COVID vaccines and flu shots.

Councilmember Fadelli - reported on attendance at the Chamber of Commerce Best of El Cerrito Awards event; announced upcoming event for holiday lights; removal of trees between school district and community center; reminder to vote on November 8th.

Mayor Quinto - reported on the 6 pm closed session and on attendance at East Bay division meeting for Cal Cities.

4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Remarks are typically limited to 3 minutes per person. The Mayor may reduce the time limit per speaker depending upon the number of speakers and may limit the total time for public comment to facilitate the completion of business on the agenda. Comments regarding non-agenda, presentation and consent calendar items will be heard first. Comments related to items appearing on the Public Hearing or Policy Matter portions of the Agenda will be heard prior to the City Council taking action on each item.

Agenda Packet Page 19 of 263

Page 3 of 8 ends

Oral Public Comments:

Vanessa Warheit - commented on fire safety, removal of eucalyptus trees, available federal funding for increasing access to electronic vehicle charging.

5. ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR
All items on the consent calendar shall be acted upon in one motion, unless a member of the City Council or staff request separate consideration.

Moved/Seconded: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama/Councilmember Rudnick Action: Approved items A, C-F, and H-K on the consent calendar as indicated below. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None
A. Family Court Awareness Month Proclamation
Action Proposed: At the request of Mayor Quinto, approve a proclamation recognizing November 2022 as Family Court
Awareness Month in El Cerrito.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved Proclamation
B. Human Rights in Iran Proclamation
Action Proposed: At the request of Mayor Quinto, approve a proclamation condemning the murder of Mahsa Amini and
expressing support of human rights in Iran.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Pulled from Consent by Councilmember Rudnick
Oral Public Comments:

Pinole Mayor Vincent Salimi, Mo Samimi, Siamak Cyrus Khojateh, Esfandiar Imani, and Jaleh Niazi spoke in support of the proclamation and human rights for the women of Iran.

Moved/Seconded: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama/Councilmember
Rudnick Action: Approved Proclamation Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson,
Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None Agenda Packet Page 20 of 263

Page 4 of 8 ends

C. United Against Hate Week
Action Proposed: Pass a motion to approve a proclamation declaring November 13 - 19, 2022 as United Against Hate Week in the City of El Cerrito.

Contact: Shannon Bassi, Senior Human Resources Analyst, Human Resources, Human Resources
Action: Approved Proclamation
D. Receive Monthly Disbursement and Check Register Reports for August 2022 and September 2022
Action Proposed: Receive and file the Monthly Disbursement and Check Register Reports for the months of August 2022 and September 2022.

Contact: Sandra Dalida, Finance Director/City Treasurer, Finance Department
Action: Received and filed
E. FY 2022-23 First Quarter Cash and Investment Report
Action Proposed: Receive and file the City's quarterly cash and investment report.

Contact: Sandra Dalida, Finance Director/City Treasurer, Finance Department
Action: Received and filed
F. Environmental Quality Committee Appointment Recommendation Action Proposed: Approve an Environmental Quality Committee recommendation to appoint Fred Bialy to the Environmental Quality Committee, effective November 8, 2022.

Contact: Christina Leard, Management Analyst III, Public Works Department; Will Provost, Operations and Environmental Services Division Manager, Public Works Department; Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Approved appointment
G. Letter of Opposition on California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Rulemaking 20-08-020
Action Proposed: At the request of Mayor Quinto, pass a motion authorizing the Mayor to sign a letter urging the CPUC to issue a revised proposed decision in the Net Energy Meeting proceeding in order to Agenda Packet Page 21 of 263

Page 5 of 8 ends

expand access to distributed solar and storage technologies.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Pulled from Consent by Councilmember Fadelli.

Moved/Seconded: Councilmember Fadelli/Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama Action: Approved letter Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Rudnick
Abstain: Councilmember Fadelli Noes: None
H. Temporary Suspension of Advisory Body Pre-Meeting Requirement Action Proposed: Pass a motion authorizing the City Clerk to suspend the pre-meeting requirement adopted by Resolution 2021-55 through the end of Fiscal Year 2022.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Action: Approved suspension of requirement
I. State Coastal Conservancy Grant Funding for the Hillside Natural Area Fire Resilience and Forest Conservation Management Plan Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution approving the grant of funds in the amount of $145,000 from the State Coastal Conservancy for the Hillside Natural Area Fire Resilience and Forest Conservation Management Plan.

Contact: Stephen Prée, Environmental Programs Manager/City Arborist; Will Provost, Operations and Environmental Services Division Manager; Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-83
J. Consultant Services Agreements for On-Call Transportation Engineering Services
Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute consultant services agreements with four consultant firms, Fehr & Peers, W-Trans, CHS Consulting Group, and TJKM, to provide on-call transportation engineering services for three years with an option to extend for an additional two years in an amount not to exceed $200,000 per fiscal year for each agreement.

Contact: Roland Lambert, Acting Engineering Manager/Senior Engineer, Public Works Department; Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department
Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-84
Agenda Packet Page 22 of 263

Page 6 of 8 ends

K. General Services Agreement for Maintenance at the El Cerrito Swim Center
Action Proposed: Adopt a resolution rejecting the bid received from USA Management LLC and accepting the other two submitted bids; and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Two Brother’s Pool and Spa in an annual amount not to exceed $60,000 in Fiscal Year 2022-23 to provide pool maintenance services for a period of three years, with the option to annually extend the contract for three years thereafter, contingent upon funding being appropriated by the City Council in future City budgets.

Contact: Beth Frazer, Recreation Supervisor, Recreation Department; Christopher Jones, Recreation Director, Recreation Department Action: Approved Resolution No. 2022-85

6. PRESENTATIONS
A. Federal Update from Congressman Desaulnier
Action Proposed: Receive and file a presentation from Congressman Desaulnier regarding federal updates and partnership throughout his tenure as El Cerrito's federal representative.

Contact: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management Item not presented, to be rescheduled.

7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Fire Hazard Abatement
Exempt from CEQA review pursuant to Sections 15304 and 15308, Notice published 10/22/2022
Action Proposed: 1) Adopt a resolution declaring weeds, rubbish, litter, or other flammable material on certain real property identified in the resolution constitutes a public nuisance; and 2) Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, adopt a resolution overriding objections by property owners and ordering the City Manager or their designee to abate certain public nuisances pursuant to El Cerrito Municipal Code Chapter 16.26.

Contact: David Yun, Fire Prevention Officer; Chase Beckman, Fire Marshal, Fire Department
Public Hearing: Mayor Quinto opened the public hearing.

No Public Comments
Agenda Packet Page 23 of 263

Page 7 of 8 ends

Moved/Seconded: Councilmember Fadelli/Councilmember Rudnick Action: Adopted Resolution (Identifying Properties) No. 2022-86.

Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None Moved/Seconded: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama/Councilmember
Abelson Action: Closed the Public Hearing. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None
Moved/Seconded: Councilmember Rudnick/Mayor Pro Tem
Motoyama Action: Adopted Resolution (Overriding Objections) No. 2022-

87. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None B. 2nd Read and Adoption of Building and Fire Code Ordinance 1st public hearing and reading 10/18/2022; Notice published 10/22/2022 Action Proposed: Conduct a public hearing, and upon conclusion, waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 2022-03 which adopts the 2022 California Green Code, Administrative, Building, Fire, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical, Energy, Residential, Existing Building Code, 2021 International Property Maintenance Code, and Related Construction Codes as applicable to all construction within the City of El Cerrito, with local modifications as outlined in the Ordinance.

Contact: Keith Marks, Building Official; Melanie Mintz, Community Development Director, Community Development Department
Public Hearing: Mayor Quinto opened the public hearing.

No public comments.

Moved/Seconded: Councilmember Rudnick/Councilmember Abelson Action: Closed the Public Hearing. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None
Moved/Seconded: Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama/Councilmember
Abelson Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 2022-3. Ayes: Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, Councilmember Abelson, Councilmember Fadelli, Councilmember Rudnick Noes: None

8. POLICY MATTERS
A. FY 2022-23 General Fund Budget Quarterly Update through September 2022
Agenda Packet Page 24 of 263

Page 8 of 8 ends

Action Proposed: Receive and file an update on City General Fund revenues and expenses for FY 2022-23 through September 2022.

Contact: Sandra Dalida, Finance Director/City Treasurer, Finance Department
Presentation and Discussion: Presenters and staff responded to comments and questions raised by members of the council regarding the timing of when the total tax amount will be known for December, factors in Community Development and Recreation increases in revenue, expenses categorized as other purchased services under general expenditures, increase of administration expenses, emphasis on department budgets, and status of cannabis tax money.

Action: Received and filed

9. CITY COUNCIL LOCAL & REGIONAL LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS
Mayor and City Council communications regarding local and regional liaison assignments and committee reports.

Councilmember Fadelli - reported on efforts of West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) regarding San Pablo Ave planning.

10. ADJOURN REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The next regularly scheduled City Council meeting is Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 7:00 p.m.

The regular meeting adjourned at 8:17 PM
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the minutes of the City Council meeting of November 1, 2022 as approved by the El Cerrito City Council.

Holly M. Charléty, MMC, City Clerk
Agenda Packet Page 25 of 263

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 5.B.

Date: November 15, 2022
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk, City Management
Subject: Authorize City Council and City Advisory Body Meetings to be Held Via Teleconference Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361)

ACTION PROPOSED
Adopt a resolution authorizing City Council and City Advisory Body meetings to be held via teleconference for a period of 30 days, and making related findings pursuant to AB 361.

BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
All meetings of the City Council and the City’s other legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Brown Act, so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business. On March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means in order to slow the spread of COVID-19. As a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up virtual meetings for all City Council meetings and other City legislative bodies. On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which, effective September 30, 2021, ended the provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 that allowed local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means.

On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 361 ("AB 361") into law which provides the ability for legislative bodies to continue meetings via teleconferencing under specified conditions and includes a requirement that the legislative body make specified findings. AB 361 took effect upon the expiration of Executive Order N-29-20 on October 1, 2021. AB 361 allows a local agency legislative body to hold a meeting utilizing teleconferencing without complying with the standard teleconferencing requirements if certain conditions exist and the legislative body makes certain findings by a majority vote in order to use the bill's exemptions to the Brown Act teleconferencing rules. Any such findings are effective for a period of 30 days, after which such findings must again be declared in order to continue meeting under the provisions of AB 361.

To date, the City Council has adopted resolutions making the necessary findings for the period between October 5, 2021 through November 19, 2022. Staff is requesting that the City Council again adopt the proposed resolution, directing staff to continue facilitating all meetings of the City of El Cerrito and City Advisory Bodies pursuant to the requirements of AB 361 in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public. If adopted, this resolution would be in effect for the 30 day period of November 20, 2022 - Agenda Packet Page 26 of 263
Agenda Item No. 5.B.

December 20, 2022.

The attached resolution makes the findings to confirm the current conditions to allow teleconference meetings pursuant to AB 361 for the City Council and on behalf of all of the commissions and committees created by the City Council pursuant to Government Code section 54952(b). The attached resolution also authorizes hybrid meetings held both via teleconference and in-person. This resolution will allow members of the public to safely observe and participate in local government teleconference meetings during the continued pandemic.

If a meeting is held via teleconference, including a hybrid meeting, the following requirements apply under AB 361:

1. Notices and agenda requirements remain the same under the Brown Act;

2. No physical location is required for public attendance or public comment. However, the public must be able to access and participate in the meeting through a call-in or an internet-based service, and instructions for how to participate must appear in the posted notices or agenda;

3. Teleconference meetings must protect the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public;

4. If there is any disruption of the call-in or internet-based service, the agency must suspend the meeting until the problem is fixed;

5. Legislative bodies may allow public comments to be submitted prior to a meeting but must also allow the public to participate in real time through call-in or internet-based service;

6. If an internet-based service requires registration through a third-party, individuals can be required to register with the third-party to participate in the meeting; and

7. When providing a public comment period, whether after each item or during a general comment period, a legislative body must allow reasonable time for members of the public to comment and must also include reasonable time for members to register with a third-party host if applicable.

In order to continue to hold teleconference or hybrid meetings, the City Council must continue to declare every 30 days that either (i) the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person, or (ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.

As long as there is not a change in public health conditions, city staff is planning to continue holding hybrid meetings for City Council which will allow for City Council, staff, presenters, and members of the public to attend either in-person or via zoom. Due to Agenda Packet Page 27 of 263
Agenda Item No. 5.B.
staffing resources and limitations of technology, staff is planning for the continuation of city board, commission and committee meetings via zoom with no in-person option for attendance.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
This action is aligned with Goal E: Ensure the Public's Health and Safety.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section is not applicable to this agenda item.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
The City Attorney has reviewed and legal considerations have been addressed.

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. County Recommendation for Safe Public Meetings
Agenda Packet Page 28 of 263
RESOLUTION 2022-XX

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY COUNCIL AND CITY ADVISORY BODY MEETINGS TO BE HELD VIA TELECONFERENCE FOR THE 30-DAY PERIOD BEGINNING NOVEMBER 20, 2022 AND MAKING RELATED FINDINGS PURSUANT TO AB 361
WHEREAS, all meetings of the City of El Cerrito’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Brown Act, so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; and WHEREAS, in addition to the City Council, the City’s legislative bodies include all boards, commissions, and committees created by the City Council pursuant to Government Code section 54952(b) (hereafter “Advisory Bodies”); and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the State of California declared a statewide emergency over the COVID-19 pandemic; and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the County of Contra Costa adopted Resolution 2020-92 declared a countywide emergency over the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-12 declaring a citywide emergency over the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Governor signed Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up teleconference meetings for all City Council meetings and all Advisory Body meetings; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08- 21 which ended the applicable provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 on September 30, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor signed AB 361 (2021) into law allowing legislative bodies to continue to conduct meetings via teleconferencing under specified conditions, including the requirement that the legislative body make specified findings. AB 361 (2021) took effect immediately; and
WHEREAS, AB 361 (2021) requires that, if a state of emergency remains active, or state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, the legislative body shall make findings that it reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and that either the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person, or state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and Agenda Packet Page 29 of 263
WHEREAS, such conditions now exist in the City, specifically, a State of Emergency due to COVID-19 continues; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 2022 the Contra Costa County Health Officer rescinded all active health orders pertaining to COVID-19 but confirmed that the recommendations for safely holding public meetings (last revised on October 4, 2022) remains in place; and
WHEREAS, the Contra Costa County Health Officer’s recommendations for safely holding public meetings include, but are not limited to, holding online meetings, as they present the lowest risk of virus transmission, and imposing social distancing measures for in-person meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) continues to recommend physical distancing of at least 6 feet from others outside of the household; and
WHEREAS, City remains concerned about COVID-19 and the health and safety of all individuals who intend to attend City Council and Advisory Body meetings; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds, acting as a legislative body pursuant to Government Code section 54952(a) and for the benefit of City Advisory Body created by the City Council pursuant to Government Code section 54952(b), that the presence of COVID-19 and the Delta and Omicron variants would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, staff, and members of the City Council and Advisory Bodies, should those bodies hold entirely in-person meetings, and that state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and WHEREAS, teleconference meetings may include hybrid meetings, in which all or some members of the City Council or Advisory Body meet in person while others attend by teleconference, and members of the public are either allowed to participate only by teleconference or both in person and by teleconference (“hybrid meetings”). The purpose of hybrid meetings is to allow for multiple modes of attending meetings while reducing the risks of COVID-19, including the Delta and Omicron variants; and WHEREAS, the City shall ensure that all City Council and City Advisory Body meetings subject to AB 361 (2021), including hybrid meetings, comply with the provisions required by AB 361 (2021) for holding teleconferenced meetings.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito that it hereby makes the following findings:

1. The above recitals are true and correct, and incorporated into this resolution.

2. In compliance with AB 361 (2021), and in order to continue to conduct teleconference meetings pursuant thereto, the City Council hereby finds that:
a. The City Council has considered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and
Agenda Packet Page 30 of 263
b. The state of emergency, as declared by the Governor, continue to directly impact the ability of the City Council and the Advisory Bodies, as well as staff and members of the public, from meeting safely in person; and
c. The CDC and the Contra Costa County Health Officer continue to recommend social distancing due to COVID-19 and as a result of the presence of COVID-19 and the Delta and Omicron variants, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, the members of City Council and the City’s Advisory Bodies, and staff.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that city staff is directed to facilitate any teleconference meetings of the City Council and City Advisory Bodies subject to AB 361 (2021), including any hybrid meetings, pursuant to the requirements of AB 361 (2021) in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall be in effect for the 30 day period of November 20, 2022 through December 20, 2022. The City Council may reconsider the circumstances necessitating this resolution within 30 days of the adoption of this resolution.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on November 15, 2022, the City Council of the City of El Cerrito passed this Resolution by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

IN WITNESS of this action, I sign this document and affix the corporate seal of the City of El Cerrito on November , 2022.
________________________
Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk
APPROVED:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 31 of 263
Recommendations for safely holding public meetings
Each local government agency is authorized to determine whether to hold public meetings in person, on-line (teleconferencing only), or via a combination of methods. The following are recommendations from the Contra Costa County Health Officer to minimize the risk of COVID-19 transmission during a public meeting.

1. Online meetings (i.e. teleconferencing meetings) are encouraged, where practical, as these meetings present the lowest risk of transmission of SARS CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID 19. This is particularly important when community prevalence rates are high. Our current trends as of October 4, 2022 in Covid-19 case rate, test positivity, Covid-19 hospitalizations, and COVID-19 wastewater surveillance are decreasing, but community transmission, as noted in CDC community transmission map, remains high. In addition to this, the predominant variant of COVID-19 being identified continues to be the Omicron variant and it’s subvariants the impact of which on the spread of COVID-19 has shown to dramatically increase COVID-19 transmission.

2. If a local agency determines to hold in-person meetings, offering the public the opportunity to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option is recommended, when possible, to give those at higher risk of and/or higher concern about COVID-19 an alternative to participating in person.

3. A written safety protocol should be developed and followed. It is recommended that the protocol require social distancing, where feasible – i.e. six feet of separation between attendees; and consider requiring or strongly encouraging face masking of all attendees and encouraging attendees to be up-to-date on their COVID-19 vaccine.

4. Seating arrangements should allow for staff and members of the public to easily maintain at least six-foot distance from one another at all practicable times.

5. Consider holding public meetings outdoors. Increasing scientific consensus is that outdoor airflow reduces the risk of COVID-19 transmission compared to indoor spaces. Hosting events outdoors also may make it easier to space staff and members of the public at least 6 feet apart. If unable to host outdoors, consider ways to increase ventilation and flow of the indoor space to reduce the risk of COVID-19 while indoors.

6. Current evidence is unclear as to the added benefit of temperature checks in addition to symptom checks. We encourage focus on symptom checks as they may screen out individuals with other Covid-19 symptoms besides fever and help reinforce the message to not go out in public if you are not feeling well.

7. Consider a voluntary attendance sheet with names and contact information to assist in contact tracing of any cases linked to a public meeting.

Revised 10-4-2022
Sefanit Mekuria, MD, MPH
Deputy Health Officer, Contra Costa County
Agenda Packet Page 32 of 263
Nola Woods
Public Affairs Director
Agenda Item No. 6.A.

Agenda Packet Page 33 of 263
District History
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 34 of 263
District History District History
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 35 of 263
District Mission Statement
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 36 of 263
What is a Vector?
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 37 of 263
District Facts
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 38 of 263
District Facts
protecting public health since 1927
2019 Trustee Photo
Agenda Packet Page 39 of 263
Special District
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 40 of 263
Mosquitoes
Rats/mice
Skunks
Ticks
Yellowjackets
Bees
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 41 of 263
Board of Trustees
Represent the best interests of your community,
ensure the delivery of essential local services and
infrastructure, and faithfully serve the public good
while upholding the law.

Source: CSDA Board Member Handbook
Agenda Packet Page 42 of 263
Board of Trustees – Appointment & Stipend
• Appointed by respective City Councils or the
County Board of Supervisors for a term of two to
four years
• Serve without compensation but are provided with
an allowance (not to exceed $100 per month) in
lieu of expenses while attending official District
Board Meetings
Agenda Packet Page 43 of 263
Board of Trustees – Meetings
• Prior to the Pandemic, regular business meetings
were held on the second Monday every other month
starting in January at the District office, 155 Mason
Circle in Concord
• Since 2020, Board of Trustee Meetings have been
held monthly and virtually.
• Anticipate a return to in person, every other month
meetings early 2023
• Meetings are open to the public
Agenda Packet Page 44 of 263
Get the word out!
Board of Trustees Needs an El Cerrito Trustee
• Share with Constituents
• Social Media
• Newsletters
• Events and Gatherings
protecting public health since 1927
Agenda Packet Page 45 of 263
155 Mason Circle, Concord
www.ContraCostaMosquito.com
Agenda Packet Page 46 of 263
1 Agenda Item No. 6.B.

Agenda Packet Page 47 of 263
2 Table of Contents
Letter from the Chief 3
Organization Chart 4
Staffing 5
Budget Overview 6
Crime Statistics 7
Use of Force Review 8
Internal Affairs 9
Aerial Drone Operations 11
Administrative Division 12
Investigations Unit 13
Field Operations Division 15
Awards and Recognition 17
Remembrance 18
Stay Informed 19
Agenda Packet Page 48 of 263
3 Letter from the Chief
September 15, 2022
Greetings El Cerritans,
Thank you for taking the time to read through our annual report from 2021.

The El Cerrito Police Department and the City of El Cerrito faced many unique challenges during the year. In 2021, we were still firmly in the midst of a response to the COVID-19 pandemic. At the start of the year, we returned our staff to a quarantine schedule to preserve available staffing for emergency calls, during an infection surge. Crime continued to remain below historical averages for the first eight months of the year, before rebounding back to normal levels beginning in September. By the end of the year, it was clear to the ECPD that crime was back to business as usual.

During 2021, our ability to respond to crime trends degraded significantly as officers sought other employment, both in and out of the law enforcement profession. If you have been keeping up on news reports lately, you may recognize that this is a nationwide trend that many are calling a police staffing crisis. In El Cerrito, our staffing crisis is all too real. Unfortunately, we have lost many highly skilled and talented officers to other careers and other agencies.

Despite these headwinds, our officers did some fantastic work last year. They patrolled the streets day and night, making an impact on car-part thieves, burglars, and robbers. Our staff members buckled down to business and did their part to help turn around our city’s previously precarious finances. Our staff assisted crime victims with care and compassion.

As we look toward the coming years, the ECPD has clear priorities. Our top priority is to continue to police our community in line with our mission statement: We protect our community, solve crimes, and pursue justice. Our second priority is to find the best police officer candidates, hire them, and return our department to acceptable staffing levels.

I am proud of the work of our police officers and professional staffers. I hope you find this document to be an interesting and informative report on your El Cerrito Police Department.

Sincerely,
Paul Keith, Chief of Police
Agenda Packet Page 49 of 263
4 Organization Chart
Agenda Packet Page 50 of 263
5 Staffing
In 2021 staffing was, and continues to be, a challenge. Negative media coverage, along with the defund movement and COVID concerns, has significantly affected law enforcement agencies throughout the country. The applicant pool to fill vacancies has been severely reduced and the job market for qualified candidates is extremely competitive.

In the last six years, the department has lost many officers, primarily due to a combination of budget cuts, officers leaving law enforcement and officers pursuing employment in other agencies.

Specialized units, such as Traffic, School Resource Officers, and Detectives have been reduced and/or cut to ensure adequate resources are available to provide Patrol services.

Current patrol staffing is at 54% of authorized strength, with most shifts relying on overtime to maintain minimum staffing requirements. The Department has made hiring efforts the top administrative priority for 2022, along with bringing back some specialized positions.

Staffing Summary as of September 2022
Sworn Staff Professional Staff
Position Filled Vacant Total Position Filled Vacant Total Chief 1 0 1 Executive Assistant 0 1 1
Captain 1 0 1 Records Supervisor 1 0 1
Lieutenant 1 1 2 Records Specialist 3 1 4
Sergeant 6 0 6 Evidence Specialist 1 0 1
Corporal 3 2 5 CSO 1 2 3
Officer 13 9 22 Cadet 2 2 4
Total 25 12 37 Total 8 6 14
Agenda Packet Page 51 of 263
6 Budget Overview

ANNUAL POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET
$12,300,818
The Police Department Budget represents 24.1% of the City’s total budget. Like other cities throughout California, public safety is a city’s largest expense. In El Cerrito we are proud to serve our residents and visitors and provide a safe and secure community for all to enjoy.

The police budget is divided into three Divisions; Administration, Patrol, and Investigations. Patrol functions are a core service and represent the largest portion of our budget, with Investigations and Police Administration representing the balance.

ADMINISTRATION
$3,779,393

OPERATIONS
$6,106,952

INVESTIGATIONS
$2,414,473
Dispatch Services Contract
Animal Services Contract
Other Contracts
Training
Front Line Staff
Traffic Enforcement
Community Service Officers
Vehicles & Equipment
Investigators
Evidence Contract
Crime Lab Fees
Crime Prevention
Agenda Packet Page 52 of 263
7 Crime Statistics
Violent crime includes murder,
forcible rape, robbery and
aggravated assault.

In 2021, there was a 8%
increase in violent crime.

Property crime includes
burglary, larceny/theft and
motor vehicle theft.

In 2021, there was a 21%
increase in property crime.

Larceny offenses increased by
over 30%.

Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics
PART 1 CRIMES TOTALS 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Murder 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0
Forcible Rape 3 1 4 2 3 4 2 3
Robbery 43 68 78 93 97 91 57 59
Aggravated Assault 29 25 51 72 52 57 55 62
Burglary 159 213 125 164 169 167 129 90
Larceny / Theft 667 902 836 1108 1055 1058 698 928
Motor Vehicle Theft 101 121 107 78 93 82 106 119
Total Offenses 1002 1331 1202 1519 1470 1460 1047 1261
2021
Calls for service: 20,842
Arrests: 367
Reports written: 2,690
Part 1 Crime Statistics
Agenda Packet Page 53 of 263
8 Use of Force Review
The vast majority of police incidents do not result in the use of force. In 2021, the El Cerrito Police Department responded to 20,842 incidents, of which only 18 resulted in the use of force by officers. This translates to a use of force rate of approximately .086% or in other words, force was used in less than one in one -thousandth of police incidents.

We track and review all uses of force involving the: Use of any weapon (including: impact weapons, firearms, taser, baton, less-lethal munitions [bean bag, foam rounds] personal body weapons [fist, knee etc.]); Use of chemical weapons such as pepper spray; Physical takedown of the subject to the ground; Use of a K9; Anytime the subject has visible injuries or reports injuries as a result of the police contact.

Use of Force is covered in our Policy Manual, under section 300; and can be found at this link:
http://el-cerrito.org/1391/Policies
A single use of force incident may
include multiple officers using a
variety of techniques. The
included chart outlines the types
and frequency of force used in
2021.

The department used force in 18
total incidents, of these: 13 were
related to a call for service, 1
involved a pedestrian stop, 3
were from a vehicle stop, and 1
was from a custodial event.

Type of Force # of times used
Control Hold 11
Direct Impact Munition 0
ECD (ex. Taser) 4
Firearm 0
Impact Weapon 0
K9 Deployment/Apprehension 3
Pepper Spray 0
Pain Compliance Technique 1
Personal Body Weapon (ex. Elbow,
knee)
1 Takedown Technique (ex. Trip, tackle) 11
WRAP 3
Total 34
Agenda Packet Page 54 of 263
9 Citizen Complaints and
Internal Affairs
California Penal Code section 832.5 requires every law enforcement agency in California to establish a procedure to investigate complaints against peace officers made by members of the public. The El Cerrito Police Department (ECPD) has established these procedures and conducts investigations into the actions of El Cerrito Police Employees when a complaint is made.

The ECPD investigates complaints from two sources: members of the public and internal complaints from within the police department.

Members of the public can make a complaint against police department personnel in several ways:
• In person at the Police Department.
• In writing; by mailing in, or dropping off a written complaint. • By direct contact to the Chief of Police or a command staff member.

Complaint forms, and instructions, can be picked up at the police department, or downloaded from our website at: www.el-cerrito.org/1004/Professional-Standards • These forms can be returned by mail, emailed, or dropped off in person.

The El Cerrito Police internal investigation process is designed to respect confidentiality and the rights of our community members and employees. We do not make judgements about the validity of complaints before we have gathered evidence and concluded an investigation.

All investigations are conducted under the requirements of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights, found in California Government Code sections 3300-3313.

Depending on the nature of the complaint, complaints are investigated by a trained internal investigator such as a Sergeant; by an outside independent certified private investigator, or by an Attorney. It is the responsibility of the investigator to interview involved people, gather and analyze evidence, and make a fact-based determination about the allegations.

Once the investigation is complete, the investigator will prepare a written report with recommend findings for each allegation, that are then reviewed by the Captain and Chief of Police.

The possible findings are:

The allegation is sustained, evidence shows the conduct did occur The allegation is not sustained, evidence shows the conduct may not have occurred The allegation is unfounded, evidence shows that the conduct did not occur The allegation shows the employee is exonerated, evidence shows that the conduct did occur, but it was lawful and proper.

Agenda Packet Page 55 of 263
10 Internal Affairs Findings
When an investigation results in a sustained finding, meaning the allegation has proven to be true and misconduct has been identified, the Police Captain makes a recommendation of discipline or corrective action to the Chief of Police. The recommendation can range from a verbal counseling all the way up to and including termination. If the investigation revealed that a crime occurred, the subject of the investigation could face prosecution. At the conclusion of an investigation, the complainant will receive a letter from the Chief of Police informing them of the findings of the investigation.

The City Manager acts in an oversight capacity for internal affairs investigations. At the conclusion of an investigation, the City Manager reviews the elements of the allegation, the findings and any discipline imposed on employees.

Investigation Results by Year
Sustained Not Sustained Unfounded Exonerated
2018 Citizen Complaint 1 1 1 0
Internal Complaint 2 2 0 0
2019 Citizen Complaint 0 0 5 3
Internal Complaint 0 3 0 0
2020 Citizen Complaint 0 2 4 2
Internal Complaint 1 0 1 0
2021 Citizen Complaint 2 0 2 0
Internal Complaint 4 2 0 0
Internal Affairs Continued
Agenda Packet Page 56 of 263
11 Aerial Drone Operations
In 2020, the ECPD began to deploy a drone or unmanned aerial system (UAS) for law enforcement uses. ECPD use drones for evidence photography, searching for missing and wanted people, and training.

The ECPD tracks and logs all drone flights.

Our monthly deployment logs can be found at: http://el-cerrito.org/1400/AerialOperations.

Drone Statistics
In 2021, the drone was deployed 5 times. Because the drone could be deployed for different uses in each incident, the total uses is higher than the total number of deployments.

UAS Operations
When flying the UAS, there must be an operator and an observer. The operator is a member of the El Cerrito Police Department who is trained as a UAS pilot and exercises control over a UAS during flight. The operator is solely responsible for the operation and for the input commands and piloting during flight.

The observer is a member of the El Cerrito Police Department who is responsible for the visual observation of the UAS while in flight. The observer maintains visual observation of the UAS while in flight and alerts the operator of any conditions that affect the safety of the flight. Both the operator and observer complete all required department-approved training in the operation, applicable laws, policies, and procedures regarding the use of the UAS.

Aerial Drone Deployment
Evidence
Search
Suspect Search Missing Person
Search
Scene
Documentation
Training
1 3 1 3 1
Agenda Packet Page 57 of 263
12 Administrative Division
RECORDS PROCESSED - 2021
Arrests Total Citations FI Cards Impounds Reports
366 325 56 204 2689
Records & Property
Records staff are public facing and provide public assistance and information at the front counter. They also fingerprint job applicants, sign off correctable citations and provide various forms of assistance to the public.

The Records staff is responsible for processing police reports through our records management system (RMS). The statistical data entered is required by the FBI, California Department of Justice (DOJ), National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and other law enforcement entities. They are also responsible for our warrant management which includes entering new warrants and removing or updating warrant status as needed.

The Records staff also provides assistance to the Investigations Bureau by preparing prosecution packages for the District Attorney’s Office. These packages include copies of reports, and compilation of sensitive and confidential information. They also assist Patrol Officers during the booking process by providing information from various law enforcement database records.

The Administrative Division plays an essential role in the management, training, risk reduction, and effectiveness of the Department. The Administrative Division oversees the Investigations Bureau, manages critical department records, ensures that officers receive continual professional training, and recruits and hires new department members. We are continually looking for new department members with the character and work ethic to support the mission, vision, and values of the Police Department.

In 2021, 82 pieces of narcotics were seized
and booked into property and evidence.

In 2021, 69 firearms were booked into
property and evidence for either destruction, safekeeping or seizure.

Evidence
In 2020, the Property and Evidence unit took in 1,749 pieces of property and evidence. This included items that were seized by officers, turned in for destruction or booked into safekeeping.

Agenda Packet Page 58 of 263
13 Investigations Unit
The El Cerrito Police Department Investigations Unit has an authorized staffing level of: One (1) Sergeant, one (1) Corporal, and six (6) Detectives. Due to staffing shortages, in 2021 this unit operated with 1 Sergeant and 3 Detectives.

In previous years, the ECPD assigned one investigator to the Safe Streets Task Force, which is run in conjunction by the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This position was suspended due to staffing constraints.

Detectives are responsible for following up on criminal reports and other incidents. Their follow-up includes follow-up interviews, collecting and gathering evidence, authoring and serving various types of warrants, canvassing crime scenes and reviewing digital and video evidence. They also register sex and arson offenders and conduct community supervision compliance checks.

Detectives prepare and present cases to the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s office for prosecution, and work collaboratively with other law enforcement agencies in the region.

Significant Cases
Carjacking
A woman was accosted, ripped from her vehicle, and shoved to the ground by an unknown suspect. The suspect then fled in the victim’s car. Detectives responded to the scene and collected video evidence from nearby businesses. They released a bulletin to other agencies about the crime. Later, a Richmond Police Officer spotted the vehicle and tried to pull it over.

The driver of the vehicle accelerated away and led the officer on a pursuit towards El Cerrito.

El Cerrito patrol units joined the chase and followed the vehicle until it exited the freeway and crashed in the landscaping at the Ashby Ave. off-ramp.

Multiple subjects fled from the vehicle. An El Cerrito Officer chased the driver across the freeway and detained him in Emeryville. All of the suspects were ultimately apprehended by officers from El Cerrito and other police agencies. Detectives presented the case and the District Attorney’s office filed felony charges against the primary suspects.

Agenda Packet Page 59 of 263
14 Financial Elder Abuse
A community member was reported as being a possible victim of financial elder abuse after their financial institution reported suspicious transactions. Through the course of the investigation, a Detective determined the victim fell prey to a romance scam and lost more than $200K. The Detective authored numerous search warrants and traced the financial transactions to the accounts of two scammers based in Georgia and Virginia. The service of several of the warrants required coordination with prosecutors from other states to domesticate search warrants for service in their jurisdictions. The investigation also revealed numerous other victims and other substantial financial losses. This case was ultimately turned over to the US Attorney’s office for prosecution.

Armed Robbery
A victim was robbed at gunpoint in a gas station parking lot. Detectives recovered video evidence of the incident and obtained the license plate of the suspect vehicle. After conducting research into the vehicle, Detectives identified a suspect and obtained a warrant for his arrest. After the suspect vehicle was located, investigators obtained a search warrant and recovered a firearm and other evidence related to the robbery. The suspect, who was on parole, was charged with several felony offenses by the District Attorney’s office.

Home Invasion Robbery
A victim was confronted in their home and viciously assaulted by several armed suspects.

The suspects fled with the victim’s property. Detectives responded and processed the scene for evidence. They also followed up on property stolen during the robbery and subsequently identified two suspects and the suspect vehicle. Detectives obtained arrest warrants for both suspects and they were both later taken into custody. Additionally, the suspect vehicle was located outside of California. Detectives coordinated the service of a search warrant and processing of that vehicle for forensic evidence by an out of state Crime Laboratory. Detectives also obtained search warrants for cell phone data records for the involved suspects. The District Attorney is still considering charges in connection with this case.

Investigations Unit
Significant Cases Continued
Agenda Packet Page 60 of 263
15 Field Operations
The uniformed members of the Field Operations Division are the front line of the El Cerrito Police Department’s law enforcement effort. This division includes patrol officers, corporals, sergeants, community service officers, and canine handlers. If a person calls the Police Department with a problem or a need for help, members of the Field Operations Division respond.

Patrol officers are among the first to arrive at traffic collisions, medical crises, and crimes in progress. The canine (K-9) handler addresses problems using different means; canine handlers rely on the enhanced senses of their canine partners for tracking and apprehension. K-9’s provide enhanced safety for their human counterparts in the department during
searches of buildings and when apprehending dangerous suspects.

This division also oversees the VIPS (Volunteers in Police Service and the Explorer POST programs.

Canine Unit (K9)
The El Cerrito Police Department has two (2) fully trained Police Canine(K9) Officers and their K9 partners: Officer Perales with K9 Bosco and Officer Cooper with K9 Roman.

Both K9 Roman and K9 Bosco are trained in protection and apprehension, as well as narcotic and article searches.

K9s are used to search for suspects who have
fled from Officers after committing a crime, detecting narcotics in homes and vehicles, and searching large areas for missing persons. Our
K9 teams are also a resource for neighboring
agencies and are often called to assist law enforcement agencies outside of El Cerrito.

Agenda Packet Page 61 of 263
16 Notable Cases
October—Carjacker Pursuit
During the night shift, officers located a carjacking suspect and gave chase, in the area of Eureka Ave. and Lexington Ave. After a brief pursuit, the suspect crashed into a parked car and fled on foot. Officers established a perimeter around the area and began searching yards with an El Cerrito K9 team. The search had a lot of ground to cover, but with the help of K9 Bosco’s nose officers found the suspect hiding in the basement of a home. When officers searched the suspect’s vehicle, they found a stolen handgun and over 75 grams of methamphetamine.

November—Assault with a Deadly Weapon
Officers responded to a call of an assault with a deadly weapon in the area of S. 55th and School St. Officers arrived at the scene and found evidence of a shooting involving multiple shots fired. The victim reported that the suspects fired on him after a roadway disagreement.

Officers and detectives scoured the area and located video footage of the suspect vehicle. Detectives put out a “Be on the Lookout” (BOLO) bulletin to all agencies in the Bay Area.

A few nights later, an officer was patrolling
through the El Cerrito Plaza and saw a vehicle that
matched the description. He approached the car
with his partner and found two people sleeping
inside. They investigated the car and discovered
four loaded handguns, three of which were ghost
guns. The occupants had warrants for their arrest
for homicide charges and criminalists at the Contra Costa County Crime Lab later linked one of the guns to the El Cerrito Shooting.

Agenda Packet Page 62 of 263
17 Awards and Recognition
Officer Michael Olivieri began his career in El Cerrito as a Police Cadet in 2016, and began learning about the roles that all employees play in the
success of the department. He continued to step
into positions that demanded great responsibility
by becoming a Records Specialist in 2017, followed by Community Service Officer in 2018. In 2019, Officer Olivieri graduated from the University of California at Berkeley and then attended the Alameda County Police Academy as a Recruit
for the El Cerrito Police Department.

In 2021, Officer Michael Olivieri was recognized
by the California Highway Patrol with the 10851
Award for his efforts to locate stolen vehicles.

Also during this year he has displayed an attitude
that encourages teamwork, achievement, and
community involvement. Officer Michael
Olivieri’s performance has been exemplary, personified the mission of the El Cerrito Police Department to protect our community, solve crime, and pursue justice, and this has led his peers and
supervisors to select him for this special recognition.

After a 30-year career in both law enforcement
and the private sector, Kent Ringgenberg joined
the El Cerrito Police Department in 2018 as a
Community Service Officer, a role in which he excelled. In 2019, he became the Property and Evidence Specialist, responsible for the safety and security of Property and Evidence at the El Cerrito Police Department. Since that time, he has continued to strive for excellence in supporting
police operations by mentoring, training, and
counseling coworkers.

Kent has a proactive mindset toward solving
problems and supporting community members.

He has displayed his dedication to the community
of El Cerrito, in ways both big and small, by supporting the work of front-line officers, setting high standards of excellence in evidence management and storage, and working to support the mission of the El Cerrito Police Department.

Property and Evidence Specialist Ringgenberg has
been selected for special recognition by his coworkers for his commendable work ethic and exemplary performance.

Officer of the Year
Michael Olivieri
Professional Staff of the Year
Kent Ringgenberg
Agenda Packet Page 63 of 263
18 Remembrance
In loving memory of
El Cerrito Police Officer
Jerrick Bernstine
On Sunday, January 9, 2022, on his way home from work, Officer Jerrick Bernstine was involved in a traffic collision on Interstate 80 near San Pablo Dam Road. A van in front of Officer Bernstine lost control and collided with the center median. Officer Bernstine’s car struck the van and he died at the scene.

Officer Bernstine began his career with the El Cerrito Police Department as an Academy Recruit in 2019 and became a Police Officer in February 2020. In his two years with the ECPD he was recognized as a model officer, combining a humble personality with a tenacious crime fighting spirit. Officer Bernstine was 26 at the time of his death and he was everything a person could hope for in a police officer, citizen, teammate, son, brother, and friend. Officer Bernstine is dearly missed and will never be forgotten.

Agenda Packet Page 64 of 263
19 Stay Informed
The El Cerrito PD App is available for free in the App and Google Play Stores.

With the app you are able to submit an anonymous tip, commend an officer, view upcoming events, and much more!
Nixle: Stay instantly informed of trusted, neighborhood-level public safety and community information. You choose the information you want, for the addresses you want, all delivered at no cost by text message, email, or web.

Follow us on Twitter @elcerritopd for all the latest information, events, pictures, and tweets from the El Cerrito Police Department.

El Cerrito residents can join private neighborhood websites to share information, including neighborhood public safety issues, community events and activities, local services, and even lost pets.

Follow us on Instagram @elcerritopolice to keep up with all the latest events, pictures and posts from the El Cerrito Police Department.

Stay up to date with letters the Chief of Police has written to the community.

All community publications can be found at http://el-cerrito.org/1548/ Community-Publications.

Agenda Packet Page 65 of 263
20 Join the Team
Find out more at:
https://www.el-cerrito.org/498/Police-Recruitment-Information Agenda Packet Page 66 of 263

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Date: November 15, 2022
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Sean Moss, Planning Manager; Melanie Mintz, Community Development Director, Community Development
Subject: San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update

ACTION PROPOSED
1) Adopt a resolution certifying the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan, adopting Environmental Impact Findings, Findings Regarding Alternatives, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); 2) Adopt a resolution amending Figure 5: the Land Use & Circulation Map of the El Cerrito General Plan; 3) Adopt a resolution amending the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and 4) Introduce and waive the first reading of an ordinance to rezone properties within the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan area.

BACKGROUND
The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP) process first began in 2007. The Plan began as a joint effort between the cities of El Cerrito and Richmond to create a shared vision and more standardized development standards along the stretch of the San Pablo Avenue corridor that is shared by both cities. The earliest efforts to create a San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan resulted in a draft document which was reviewed by the El Cerrito City Council in 2011. The El Cerrito City Council did not adopt the initial Plan and issued a series of recommendations, including increasing building heights and densities, providing more flexible parking standards and a more flexible approach to mixed-use development, including allowing ground-floor residential uses. In response to these comments, with grant funding, the Specific Plan process was restarted in 2013. At this time, the Plan was substantially overhauled and revised, a Complete Streets Plan was added, and the scope of the environmental review was expanded to include an Environmental Impact Report. The revised plan was adopted by the El Cerrito City Council on October 7, 2014. The Plan has not been amended since its adoption.

The Plan includes the following Chapters:
 Chapter 1: Introduction
Establishes the framework and goals of the Specific Plan  Chapter 2: Form Based Code
Establishes regulations for the built environment
 Chapter 3: Complete Streets
Establishes plans and policies to improve San Pablo Avenue for all modes and users
Agenda Packet Page 67 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
 Chapter 4: Infrastructure
Evaluates the infrastructure needed to accommodate the development of the Specific Plan
 Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
The program EIR established a streamlined, comprehensive CEQA process throughout the Plan area
As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR evaluated a development capacity 1,706 new residential units and 243,112 of net new square feet of commercial space within the Plan area by 2040. The EIR also noted that, “when and if these numbers are reached, regardless of the year they are reached, new environmental analysis, documentation, and determination pursuant to CEQA would need to be conducted.” Between the Plan’s adoption and the beginning of 2019, over 1,400 residential units had been entitled or proposed, leaving only 282 units within the analyzed development capacity. Therefore, in order to continue the plan’s success, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report was necessary in order to analyze additional development capacity.

City staff successfully applied for grants from both the Department of Housing and Community Development's SB2 Planning Grant program and MTC's Priority Development Area Planning Grant program to update the Plan, primarily the EIR in order to provide for additional capacity. From its inception, the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update has been undertaken as a limited update, to establish capacity in order to continue the Plan's successes and incorporate changes needed due to lessons learned during 8 years of Plan implementation. The City commenced the Specific Plan update process in 2019. On January 16, 2019, a joint body of the Planning Commission and Design Review Board reviewed the proposed scope for the update. The proposed scope was presented in terms of a series of topics areas identified for inclusion in the Specific Plan update. The body provided feedback to City staff. On February 5, 2019, the City Council considered this scope which was modified based on feedback from the Planning Commission and Design Review Board. The Council directed staff to proceed with the proposed scope, as presented without modifications.

On November 20, 2020, the City issued a Notice of Preparation for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update. A public scoping meeting for the SEIR was held on December 3, 2020. As part of the scoping process for the SEIR, the El Cerrito Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) adopted and made recommendations to City staff and the Planning Commission regarding the Specific Plan update and the SEIR. These recommendations were forwarded to the Planning Commission and are included in the SEIR under NOP Comment Letters (EIR Appendix 24.1).

Agenda Packet Page 68 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

On March 31, 2021, a joint body of the Planning Commission and Design Review Board reviewed more detailed proposals for the topic areas identified in the scope for the Specific Plan update. The joint body provided feedback to City staff to assist City staff and the City’s consultant, MIG, in finalizing the detailed project description for the SEIR.

In July 2022, the City’s consultant completed the Draft SEIR and the document was circulated for a 45-day public review and comment period as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) along with the draft of the Specific Plan update on July 19, 2022. On August 17, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a meeting and received comments on the Draft SEIR. Immediately following this meeting, a joint body of the Planning Commission and Design Review Board reviewed the draft of the Specific Plan update.

On August 9, 2022, the Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) received a presentation from City staff on the Specific Plan Update and SEIR. At the conclusion of the presentation and discussion, the EQC passed a unanimous motion to recommend to the Planning Commission and Council that the SEIR not be certified without addressing additional climate actions to meet stated climate goals, including all-electric buildings, increased EV infrastructure readiness and reducing embodied GHG emissions associated with construction materials, and to recommend analysis of recent federal legislation, as well as state and regional funding opportunities supporting the funding of greenhouse gas emission reductions.

On October 19, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed the final draft of the Specific Plan update. After receiving public comments, and discussing the proposed final draft, the Commission passed a motion unanimously with four Commissioners in attendance to recommend that the City Council certify the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update, adopt the update to the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan with amendments to require building electrification for all new buildings subject to Tier II or Tier IV Design Review, and to increase the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) requirement to 20% of parking spaces for all new buildings subject to Tier II or Tier IV Design Review, with potential appeals processes, waivers, and small projects and special cases clarifications as determined by staff.

ANALYSIS
The Specific Plan update has been developed according to the project scope that was endorsed by the City Council in February 2019. The sections below will discuss each of the topic areas identified in the 2019 project scope and will detail the changes that have been developed as part of the Specific Plan update to address each topic. The Specific Plan update is available for review at: http://www.el-cerrito.org/SPASP.

Chapter 1: Introduction
The Introduction has been updated to reflect the 2022 Specific Plan update and changes that have been made regarding City policy documents and State regulations since 2014. Most notably, the goals and strategies of the Specific Plan have been Agenda Packet Page 69 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
revised to reflect changes in State legislation, changes in City policies, and shifting community values since 2014.

Chapter 2: Form Based Code
The Form Based Code Chapter has been revised most substantially. The revisions are discussed below, organized by topic area.

Expand Commercial Requirements
Prior to the adoption of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (“Plan” or “SPASP”), commercial uses were required on the ground floor of all development along San Pablo Avenue, although very little commercial development had occurred in many years and economic indicators were poor for new commercial development. Several economic studies commissioned by the City recommended a more strategic approach to the ground floor commercial requirement, e.g. focusing commercial requirements in “nodes” to create more pedestrian-oriented activity and to support transit-oriented development while allowing groundfloor residential elsewhere. Furthermore, studies confirmed that the City’s strongest path to economic development was to attract urban residential development. Currently, commercial uses are required for 50% of the ground floor frontage of projects located only on the San Pablo Avenue Commercial and Major Commercial Street types, e.g. commercial requirements were significantly reduced.

These commercial street types are located near the two BART stations, at the Stockton Avenue and Moeser Lane commercial nodes, and along the portions of Fairmount Avenue, Stockton Avenue, and Hill Street that are within the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan area.

While demand for retail real estate is overall declining throughout the region, as the Specific Plan area develops there will be continued need for new high-quality commercial spaces to support the overall goals of the Plan. In most places where the requirement to add commercial space has been added, it is either on existing commercial properties and represents an overall decrease in the required commercial square footage, and/or is at a key node. The goal is to have a variety of commercial spaces available to retain and attract new businesses, while not negatively impacting project feasibility. The changes to these designations can best be seen by comparing Figure 2.01.02 (page 02-2) to the crossed-out figure preceding it from the 2014 Plan.

The 2019 scope for the Specific Plan update included an evaluation of a Commercial Priority Overlay Zone to preserve commercial uses in limited areas that benefit from freeway access and proximity. Staff evaluated this potential revision and determined that the expansion of the Commercial Street types will achieve a similar goal of preserving commercial uses in key locations in the Plan area. Further, the recent adoption of SB 330 currently prevents cities from 'downzoning' property zoned for residential development. SB 330 makes implementation of a Commercial Priority Overlay Zone difficult to impossible since it would limit residential development within the zone. A Commercial Priority Overlay Zone has not been included in the Specific Plan update.

Agenda Packet Page 70 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Daylight Plane and Shadow Standards
The shadow and daylight plane standards contained in SPASP Section 2.05.02.02.03 of the 2014 Specific Plan proved difficult to administer. As a result of confusion among these standards, the Zoning Administrator issued an interpretation on May 1, 2018 that was intended to clarify the application of the standards.

In addition, during the implementation of the Specific Plan and the Specific Plan update process, staff has heard input and concern from members of the public regarding the massing and scale of development on the Neighborhood Streets street type, especially adjacent to existing residential land uses.

In order to address these issues, the daylight plane and shadow standards have been clarified. Changes to these standards are best summarized as the following and can be seen in Section 2.05.02.02 (pages 02-73 through 02-75):

1. Standards for sites adjacent to existing residential uses have been revised in favor of daylight plane standards instead of shadow standards.

2. Standards along Neighborhood Streets have been clarified and revised in favor of shadow standards instead of daylight plane standards.

3. Shadow standards have been clarified to apply to multiple street types.

The previous standards for sites adjacent to existing residential uses limited shadows to extending across a property line a maximum of 14 feet on parcels to the east. Parcels to the west were specifically excluded due to solar angle, and parcels to the north and south were previously not mentioned. In order to limit substantial changes in scale between existing and proposed development and to minimize shadows in more locations, staff developed a standard that will apply broadly to sites that are adjacent to existing residential uses, regardless of the direction of those uses. The standard includes a daylight plane that extends to 25 feet at the property line and then angles back at a 45-degree angle. The massing of new buildings adjacent to existing residential uses will be required to comply with this daylight plane. The standards along all other street types consist of shadow standards that require shadows not to extend past the curb line on the opposite side of the street on the Winter Solstice.

Design Review Process
The changes to the Design Review processes can be seen in Section 2.02.06.04 (pages 02-25 through 02-28). All Design Review Tiers have been revised to clarify the applicability of each tier. Tier III Design Review has been refined to make the threshold more qualitative (e.g. substantial exterior modification) rather than quantitative (e.g. 50% of the assessed value). These changes will make the Tier III Design Review process easier to administer. In addition, Tier IV Design Review has been revised to clarify the applicability and the scope of both the Planning Commission’s and the Design Review Board’s authority, and the required findings have been refined. Section

2.02.06.04 has been revised with heavy involvement of the City Attorney, in order to ensure that the process remains objective as required by State law.

Agenda Packet Page 71 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Pre-application Process
Based on experience implementing the Specific Plan, City staff have found that opportunities for early public review and comment can strengthen project proposals.

The 2014 Specific Plan contains an optional “community charrette” process. This process has not been utilized to date. During meetings in the Specific Plan update, the Planning Commission expressed a desire to require applicants of projects over a certain size to host a community meeting. As part of the Specific Plan update, Section

2.02.05.02 (page 02-19) has been revised to add a process that requires applicants for projects of more than five residential units to host a community meeting early in the design process. This meeting process (including public notice) would be conducted entirely by the applicant, with limited assistance from City staff, as necessary—to generate the mailing list for public notices, for example. The intent of the community meeting is to allow for the exchange of information and ideas early in the design process.

Land Use Regulations
The land use regulations in the Specific Plan update have been modified in several areas to be more consistent with the other City goals such as economic development, housing and complete streets goals. FBC Table 02 (pages 02-11 through 02-14), which regulates land uses in the Specific Plan area, has been revised. Notable changes include:

1. Removing the requirement for an Administrative Use Permit for restaurants that serve alcohol. All restaurants will now be treated the same. This change was made in consultation with the El Cerrito Police Department. (The 2014 Plan removed the requirement for a Use Permit for food uses.)

2. Permitting accessory dwelling units and large-family daycare in all districts as required by recent changes to State law.

3. Adding Low Barrier Navigation Center as a residential use, as required by State law.

4. Reclassifying Live-Work as a residential use so that it does not satisfy commercial frontage requirements on commercial street types.

5. Permitting General Markets in all districts. Currently all General Markets require an Administrative Use Permit.

6. Referencing the Tobacco Retailers Ordinance with regard to tobacco sales uses.

7. Requiring a Conditional Use Permit for Recycling Collection Points and Recycling Processing Facilities. Recycling Collection Points and Processing Facilities have been the subject of many code enforcement issues across the City and staff would like to ensure a higher level of review for these uses. In addition, changes in the recycling industry since the Specific Plan was first adopted have greatly reduced the utilization of privately operated Recycling Processing Facilities.

8. Processes for outdoor dining uses have been streamlined. Outdoor dining along public right-of-way frontages will be allowed by-right; however, permanent installations and installations on the street (e.g. a parklet) would be subject to the review of the Public Works Department. On private property, in areas other than Agenda Packet Page 72 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
along a public-right-of-way frontage, in order to assure outdoor uses are managed to minimize impact to adjacent properties, an Administrative Use Permit will continue to be required (note: this has been suspended during the public health emergency and will be considered further by the City Council at a later time).

Major Commercial Street Standards
In the 2014 Specific Plan, the public-right-of-way and front setback standards are the same on both San Pablo Avenue Commercial and Major Commercial street types.

Generally, the Major Commercial Streets (Fairmount Avenue, Stockton Avenue and Hill Street) have a different character and profile than San Pablo Avenue. Additionally, the City has made significant investments in Fairmount Avenue streetscape improvements which have improved the appearance and usability of Fairmount Avenue, but which are not consistent with the right-of-way standards for Major Commercial Streets. In acknowledgement of the scale of these streets, and the existing improvements on Fairmount Avenue, the Major Commercial Street standards in Section 2.04.02.02 (pages 02-47a through 02-47d) have been revised.

Neighborhood Streets
As mentioned in the discussion on Daylight Plane and Shadow Standards, staff has received feedback during the implementation of the Specific Plan about the scale of proposed development along Neighborhood Streets. The intent of the Neighborhood Street standards in the 2014 Specific Plan was to allow denser development while preserving the existing character and scale of Neighborhood Streets. The Neighborhood Street standards in Section 2.04.02.04 (pages 02-56 through 02-59) have been revised to add a 10-foot Activity Zone. This zone is appropriate for Neighborhood Streets which are smaller streets with a more neighborhood scale. Additionally, a note has been added that clarifies that private front yards are permitted in the Activity Zone. The standards have also been revised to reduce the ground floor ceiling height for residential uses. The intent of the higher ceiling height was to allow residential uses to more easily convert to commercial uses in the future. Most locations on Neighborhood Streets are, at best, marginal locations for commercial uses and are not envisioned to convert to commercial uses in the foreseeable future. The Neighborhood Street standards allow for residential frontage types, and these frontages are compatible with a lower, albeit still generous, ceiling height.

Green Infrastructure (Stormwater Infrastructure)
The City Council adopted the City’s Green Infrastructure Plan in 2019. Green infrastructure refers to the construction and retrofit of storm drainage to reduce public runoff volumes, disperse runoff to vegetated areas, promote infiltration and evapotranspiration, and the use of bioretention and other natural systems to detain and treat runoff before it reaches our creeks and San Francisco Bay. Green infrastructure differs from the bioretention requirement on private property ("C.3") that requires all new development to treat its own stormwater runoff. Green infrastructure can be incorporated into construction on new and previously developed parcels, as well as new and rebuilt streets, roads, and other infrastructure within the public right-of-way.

Agenda Packet Page 73 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

References to the Green Infrastructure Plan have been incorporated throughout the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan as part of the update and projects are required to evaluate opportunities for Green Infrastructure. Notably, the Green Infrastructure Opportunity Sites have been added to the Open Space Map on page 02-5.

Open Space Standards
The Specific Plan requires new development to provide different types of open space.

New residential development must provide common/private open space in the ratio 80 square feet/unit. Private open space is private to a particular unit (e.g. a private yard or balcony). Common open space is typically for the exclusive use of residents of a building and is shared among those residents. The 2014 Specific Plan allowed a project applicant to divide the required open space between private and common open space as they saw fit. In addition, buildings over 25,000 square feet are required to provide 25 square feet of publicly accessible open space for every 1,000 square feet of building area, or to pay a fee in-lieu of providing public open space on a project site. Publicly accessible open space remains privately owned and maintained by the project, but is available for public use, typically during daylight hours, at a minimum. As part of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update, the open space standards have been revised in the following ways:

1. Requiring 30% of the required common/private open space square footage to be allocated to individual, private open spaces (page 02-97).

2. Requiring the provision of onsite public open space for larger projects, with more than 150 units or on sites larger than 1 acre (page 02-97). (Also see discussion of the waiver to this requirement in the Waivers section.)

3. The balcony requirements have been revised to require balconies on street facing elevations. (Also see discussion of the waiver to this requirement in the Waivers section.)

4. Minimum dimensions have been established for private open spaces. The adopted San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan does not contain minimum dimensions for such spaces. In some circumstances, staff had to refer to standards in the Zoning Ordinance. Adopting these standards as part of the Specific Plan update will make their implementation much clearer. (Section 2.05.06.02.01.03 on page 02-98a.)
Parking/Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
The Specific Plan allows parking within a range by right (1 to 1.5 space per unit in the Transit Oriented Mid Intensity Mixed Use district and 0.5 to 1 space per unit in the Transit Oriented High Intensity Mixed Use district). Currently, for projects with lower parking ratios, the Zoning Administrator requires a parking study and additional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures. Section 2.05.08.05 (page 02- 116) has been revised to clarify the process for requesting automobile and bike parking reductions. The parking reduction process for projects that qualify for a State Density Bonus has also been clarified. Staff notes that these changes may be largely mooted in January 2023 when the recently signed AB 2097 takes effect. AB 2097 prohibits cities from imposing minimum parking requirements within ½ mile of public transit.

Agenda Packet Page 74 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Light and Air Exposure to Units
The Design Review Board has expressed interest in evaluating requirements related to the dimension of courtyards which are internal to a project to ensure appropriate dimensions (length, width and height) to create usable open spaces and provide sufficient light and air to adjacent residential units.

Requirements or internal courtyards have been added to the Specific Plan as part of the update (Section 2.05.06.03, page 02-98b). In order to preserve light and air exposure to courtyards and adjacent units, these requirements establish minimum dimensions for interior courtyards based on the depth of the courtyard.

Waivers
Section 2.02.07.04 of the 2014 Specific Plan (renumbered as Section 2.02.06.07 in the Specific Plan update) creates a process for waivers to certain standards. The waivers process allows a decision-making body for a project to consider waivers to specific standards that are listed in the Section. This process is distinct from the Tier IV Design Review process which allows the Planning Commission to grant exceptions to standards that are not listed in the Waivers section. At the August 17, 2022 joint Planning Commission and Design Review Board meeting, the joint body expressed a desire to add flexibility to the standards of the Specific Plan in several areas. To address these comments, the Specific Plan update has expanded the list of standards that qualify for waivers. The expanded list of waivers can be found in Section 2.02.06.07 on page 02-30.

Specific Plan Area Boundary
The development of transit-oriented development (TOD) on the surface parking lots at the El Cerrito Plaza BART station is moving forward, as previously discussed by the City Council. Most of the project site lies within the Specific Plan area. However, the BART-owned parking lot bounded by Richmond Street, Central Avenue, the Ohlone Greenway, and Willow Street is outside the area of the 2014 Specific Plan and is currently a remnant of the City’s Transit Oriented Mixed Use (TOM) zoning district that was in place in the San Pablo Avenue corridor prior to the adoption of the Specific Plan.

In order to bring the entire development site into the Specific Plan area, a boundary change to the Specific Plan boundary is proposed. This change requires rezoning through an ordinance, which is attached to this report. This rezoning brings the site into compliance with AB 2923, which requires minimum zoning on BART-owned properties.

Planning Commission Recommendation
As discussed above in the Background section, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Specific Plan update with amendments to the Plan regarding building electrification and EV charging. The building electrification and EV charging requirements recommended by the Planning Commission are outside the scope of the Specific Plan update that was reviewed by the Planning Commission and Design Review Board and endorsed by the City Council in 2019. However, City staff have drafted modifications that could be included in the Specific Plan update if the City Council wishes to incorporate the Planning Commission’s recommendation with Agenda Packet Page 75 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
respect to building electrification and EV charging. The City is also preparing an update to the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) at this time. Based on previous direction from the City Council and the City Council Climate Action Subcommittee, staff had planned to include building electrification as part of the CAP update. The Request for Proposals for the Climate Action Plan included identification of an “early-win” climate strategy that could be implemented ahead of the adoption of the CAP update. However, based on the Planning Commission’s recommendation, building electrification could be included in the Specific Plan update. As noted below, the inclusion of electrification requirements and increased EV charging requirements is being incorporated into the Plan with exceptions, because the two requirements were not able to be fully vetted for their impact on the other goals of the Plan, e.g. financial feasibility of private commercial and residential development projects.

Building Electrification
Building Electrification means a prohibition on the use of natural gas as a fuel source in new buildings. As electricity generation becomes less carbon-emitting, building electrification can reduce the carbon emissions of buildings. In California, to date, natural gas is commonly used for water heating, space heating, and cooking purposes in residential units. These natural gas uses can be substituted with electric heat pumps, induction cooktops, and other appliances that run on electricity. The 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen Building Code) requires all new units to be “electric ready,” meaning that electrical systems be provided to an area that has natural gas appliances so that an electric appliance could be substituted in the future. The Planning Commission’s recommendation would go beyond this new CalGreen requirement and would prohibit natural gas in new buildings.

The Planning Commission’s recommendation allowed City staff to develop building electrification requirements with waivers and clarifications for small projects and special cases. Accordingly, staff has developed language banning the use of natural gas which applies to new residential units in projects of 5 units or more throughout the Plan area and with exemptions for technical infeasibility and financial infeasibility.

Natural gas prohibition for commercial uses can be challenging because there are not always viable substitutes for natural gas use in a commercial setting (certain types of cooking processes in a commercial kitchen, for example) and there may be other commercial projects similarly negatively impacted by such a prohibition. The City of Berkeley has been sued by the California Restaurant Association over the City of Berkeley’s natural gas ban in restaurants. The case is currently pending before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

EV Charging
The 2022 CalGreen building code will require new multi-family projects of 20 units and hotels and motels with 20 or more guest rooms to equip 5% of parking spaces with Level 2 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). EVSE is all of the equipment needed to charge an electric vehicle and is often referred to as an EV charger.

Additionally, the 2022 CalGreen code requires that 25% of parking spaces be EV Agenda Packet Page 76 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
ready, e.g. that the spaces are equipped with low power Level 2 charging receptacles to support future chargers. The 2022 CalGreen code also requires that 10% of parking spaces be EV capable, meaning that a raceway (conduit) is provided from the electric panel to each EV capable parking space and electric panel capacity is provided to support future charging.

Prior to the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the Specific Plan update included a requirement that all parking spaces include a conduit from the electric panel to each parking space. This requirement is contained in Section 2.05.08.07(O) on page 02-120. Based on the Planning Commission’s recommendation, City staff have drafted language that would increase the EVSE requirement to 20% of parking spaces for parking serving new projects of 5 units or more, or 6,000 square feet of commercial space or more, with exceptions for technical infeasibility and financial infeasibility.

Chapter 3: Complete Streets
The only revision to the Compete Streets Chapter is a note that states that the Chapter has not been revised as part of the 2022 Specific Plan update. The Complete Streets Chapter will continue to be implemented as funding becomes available and through required frontage improvements through private development. Notably, the El Cerrito del Norte Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Complete Streets Improvements project which is currently in the design phase will implement key components of the Complete Streets Chapter and is funded through a variety of sources, including developer impact fees and grants.

Chapter 4: Infrastructure
The Infrastructure Chapter has been revised to accommodate changes since 2014 and to address infrastructure needs in terms of the increased development capacity.

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR)
Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15163 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update. The scope of the SEIR is limited to environmental issues raised by the differences between the Specific Plan Update and the 2014 adopted Specific Plan described and evaluated in the 2014 Specific Plan EIR.

The SEIR is available for review at: http://www.el-cerrito.org/SPASP. The SEIR consists of two volumes: the Draft SEIR and the Final SEIR. The Draft SEIR contains the project description and the environmental analysis described below. The Final SEIR contains the comments received during the public review period and the responses to those comments.

The SEIR analyzes a total of 14 environmental topic areas. Each chapter analyzes an environmental topic area and describes the environmental setting and the regulatory setting for the topic. The chapter then describes any potential supplemental impact of the plan update that exceeds the analysis in the 2014 EIR. Each chapter goes on to conclude whether the impacts remain less-than-significant with implementation of the Agenda Packet Page 77 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
mitigation measures in the 2014 EIR or whether supplemental mitigation measures are required to reduce the impact of the Specific Plan update to a less-than-significant level.

Throughout the SEIR, only one supplemental impact was identified that required supplemental mitigation. This supplemental impact is in the area of Tribal Resources (Chapter 7). The addition of the supplemental impact and mitigation mainly stem from the fact the Tribal Resources was a topic area added to the Appendix G CEQA Checklist after 2014, and was not explicitly analyzed in the 2014 EIR. Supplemental Mitigation Measure 7-1 requires notification of the Native American Heritage Commission in the event of an archeologic discovery that appears to be Native American in nature. It also requires the City to conduct consultation with appropriate tribal contacts in the event of such a discovery.

The SEIR also concludes that the Significant and Unavoidable Impacts identified in the 2014 EIR remain unchanged with the following exception: Impact 16-1: Cumulative Traffic Impacts (Chapter 16) is no longer a significant unavoidable impact or a cumulative impact for the Specific Plan Update. This is due to the change in metric from Level of Service (LOS)/Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS) in the 2014 EIR to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in the SEIR. This change in metric is required by changes to the CEQA Guidelines as a result of SB 743.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
The SPASP directly implements several of the goals and strategies, and is consistent with, the overall Strategic Plan. The primary goals and strategies furthered by the SPASP include:
 Goal B: Achieve long-term financial sustainability. Attract and maximize opportunities for new/expanding businesses.
 Goal C: Deepen a sense of place and community identity. Reimagine underdeveloped and underutilized properties through advance planning efforts that encourage investment and/or new development. Encourage use of alternative modes of transportation to connect people and create a sense of community.
 Goal F: Foster environmental sustainability citywide. Implement the City’s Climate Action Plan, including: Reducing vehicle miles traveled (by creating a well connected, pedestrian, bicycle and transit-oriented urban form that will make it easier for residents and visitors to leave their car behind.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) has been prepared for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update. A Notice of Preparation was issued on November 20, 2020. The Draft SEIR was circulated for public review and comment and a Notice of Availability was published with the Contra Costa County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse on July Agenda Packet Page 78 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.
19, 2022. The Final SEIR with response to the comments received during the public review period has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Preparation of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report have been funded by two grants: a Metropolitan Transportation Commission Priority Development Area Planning Grant and a State SB 2 Grant totaling $468,000.

The costs of processing entitlement applications in the Specific Plan area will continue to be paid by project applicants. Implementation of the Complete Streets chapter of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan will be funded by developer contributions (e.g. the City's Transportation Impact Fee), grants, and available City, Regional, State and Federal funds. Infrastructure identified in the Infrastructure chapter of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan will be funded by a variety of mechanisms, including developer impact fees.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
The City Attorney has been involved throughout the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update process and has reviewed the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for compliance with applicable laws.

Reviewed by:

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution (Certifying the SPASP Update SEIR)

2. Exhibit A to the Resolution (Findings for Certification )

3. Exhibit B to the Resolution (Mitigation Monitoring Plan)

4. Resolution (Adopting SPASP Update General Plan Amendment)

5. Exhibit A to the Resolution (General Plan Amendment Map)

6. Resolution (Adopting SPASP Update)

7. Exhibit A to SPASP Update Revision Regarding Natural Gas Prohibition

8. Exhibit B to SPASP Update Revision Regarding EVSE Requirements

9. Ordinance

10. Exhibit A to Ordinance
Agenda Packet Page 79 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 1
RESOLUTION 2022-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING THE

FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SAN PABLO

AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE, ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

FINDINGS, FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES, ADOPTING A STATEMENT

OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2020, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (SPASP) update pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2020, a public Scoping Meeting for the SEIR was held; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2022 the Draft SEIR was circulated for public comment; and
WHEREAS, on August 9, 2022 the Planning Commission heard public comment on the Draft SEIR in a public meeting; and
WHEREAS, on September 2, 2022, the public comment period for the Draft SEIR closed; and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2022 the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the SEIR;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of El Cerrito finds that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines and Section 19.42 of the El Cerrito Municipal Code:

1. Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report was circulated on November 20, 2020. A scoping meeting was held at City Hall on December 3, 2020. The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was circulated on July 19, 2022 the public comment period on the Draft SEIR ended on September 2, 2022. Pursuant to CEQA, comments received during the comment period have been responded to in the Final SEIR which is now before the City Council for consideration.

2. The analysis contained in the SEIR has been developed using experts in related fields to professional standards stipulated by the CEQA Guidelines and by prevailing CEQA case law.

3. The Final SEIR was presented to the City Council prior to the November 15, 2022 meeting. The City Council reviewed the SEIR and has considered the analysis contained therein.

Agenda Packet Page 80 of 263

4. On November 15, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing and heard public comments and testimony regarding the Final SEIR.

5. The Final SEIR has been developed by City of El Cerrito staff and the City’s consultant, using the analysis of experts in related fields. The final SEIR reflects independent expert analysis and the City of El Cerrito’s independent judgment.

6. The City Council certifies that the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

7. The City hereby makes the findings and adopts a statement of overriding considerations in compliance with Sections 15091, 15092, 15093, and 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines and Sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6 of CEQA, as set forth in detail in the attached Exhibit A, and based on the above certified Final SEIR and substantial evidence in the record.

8. The City Council hereby adopts the mitigation measures and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to be implemented for each mitigation measure as included in Exhibit B, in compliance with Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines.

9. The location of the documents that constitute the record of proceedings are available for public review during business hours at El Cerrito City Hall, Community Development Department, 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito CA.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on November 15, 2022 the City Council of the City of El Cerrito passed this Resolution by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Attachment 2
Exhibit A

FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER

THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

FOR THE SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE
(Public Resources Code, section 21000 et. seq.)
I. INTRODUCTION
The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update ("project") represents an update to the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan which was adopted in 2014. The Specific Plan contains the following elements: (1) a Form-Based Code (FBC); (2) multi-modal transportation goals and policies, recommended streetscape design improvements, and design standards as part of the Complete Streets Plan; and (3) infrastructure improvements.

The Specific Plan Update:

1. Form-Based Code
The Specific Plan Form-Based Code (FBC) supports the community vision of a vibrant, walkable, sustainable, and transit-oriented corridor that respects surrounding neighborhoods, by establishing development standards that further these goals.

2. Complete Streets Plan
The Complete Streets Plan provides direction for the redesign and development of the street rightof-way (ROW) in the Plan area, such as travel lanes, intersections, bike lanes, cycletracks, crosswalks, and medians. The Plan also provides guidance for the pedestrian realm of the ROW.

The Complete Streets Plan aims to create a streetscape environment that balances the needs of all users and encourages “mode shift” to increase the percentage of pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users.

3. Infrastructure Systems
The Specific Plan update (especially the Infrastructure Systems chapter) includes infrastructure goals and policies, and recommends feasible improvements to infrastructure systems to support the Plan objectives. The systems evaluated in the plan include water, wastewater, storm drainage, and dry utilities (e.g., gas, electric, cable).

Development Capacity Assumptions
The certified EIR notes, “When and if [the development capacity] numbers are reached, regardless of the year they are reached, new environmental analysis, documentation, and determination pursuant to CEQA would need to be conducted.” This SEIR is that new environmental analysis, documentation, and determination for the Specific Plan Update. No site-specific, individual development proposals will be approved as part of the Specific Plan Update SEIR certification Agenda Packet Page 82 of 263
2 process. Any such individual project would be subject to its own CEQA review, including evaluation against the Specific Plan SEIR.

The Plan area development capacity assumptions used for the impact analyses in the 2014 EIR were first based on projections provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) for the Plan area, then on entitled and planned projects in the Plan area, and projections for the construction of projects consistent with the Form-Based Code development standards. For this SEIR, ABAG Plan Bay Area growth projections were applied to the development standards, including on-site parking, site layout, and height parameters, to forecast a realistic growth projection for the Specific Plan area. The development capacity assumptions also incorporate locally refined data of development feasibility that is more precise than regional projections.

The Specific Plan update requires the following approvals:

Implementation of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update would require, but not be limited to, the following discretionary approvals:
 Certification of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report  Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program  Adoption of amendments to the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (the Specific Plan update)  Adoption of General Plan amendments and zoning changes as necessary to ensure consistency between the Specific Plan and the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance  Discretionary review as necessary, including CEQA review, for future individual public and private development proposals in the Plan area
II. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The City Council has determined that the Project has been designed to meet the following objectives:

Goal A: Enliven San Pablo Avenue
Strategy 1: Attract pedestrian activity, and increase residential population to foster community, support businesses and create places of interest.

Strategy 2: Attract new businesses and support existing businesses.

Strategy 3: Improve walkability through more intensive and varied development that provides additional services and locates more future residents in service-rich nodes.

Strategy 4: Plan for all modes of travel.

Strategy 5: Require active ground-floor commercial uses at key nodes.

Strategy 6: Provide publicly-accessible open spaces in appropriate locations.

Strategy 7: Encourage dynamic public art.

Goal B: Encourage Practical and Market Friendly Development Strategy 1: Provide development clarity and objective design standards to encourage investment.

Strategy 2: Incorporate flexible development codes processes and standards that respond to constrained parcels, surrounding context and the market.

Agenda Packet Page 83 of 263
3 Strategy 3: Allow ground floor residential development to provide flexibility and expand the Specific Plan Area’s residential base.

Goal C: Support Climate Action Goals
Strategy 1: Encourage modern higher-density development in the Specific Plan area in order to increase resource efficiency of housing units.

Strategy 2: Reduce vehicle miles traveled by locating higher-density development in close proximity to transit and bicycle infrastructure and commercial and public-serving uses.

Strategy 3: Invest in public right-of-way improvements that enhance travel for transit users, pedestrians and bicyclists through public funding and private contributions.

Strategy 4: Reduce parking requirements to encourage transit use and reduce reliance on the private automobile and to make development near transit more feasible.

Strategy 5: Incorporate Complete Streets that enhance the experience, safety, and efficiency of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users.

Goal D: Create Housing That Supports a Diverse Population Strategy 1: Encourage a range of units types across the Specific Plan area.

Strategy 2: Promote the creation of affordable housing units through implementation of the City’s Inclusionary Zoning requirements and through partnering with affordable housing providers.

Strategy 3: Allow new development to provide housing that responds to market demands.

Strategy 4: Support diversified transportation options for residents by promoting housing development in proximity to existing or planned transportation investments.

Strategy 5: Continue to support a wide variety of community amenities to attract and maintain a diverse population.

Strategy 6: Allow sufficient housing in the Specific Plan area to accommodate the City’s required Regional Housing Needs Allocation at all income levels.

III. GENERAL FINDINGS AND OVERVIEW
A. Procedural Background
On September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan and certified the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number 2014042025) (Specific Plan EIR), which assessed the potential environmental impacts of implementing the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan. The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report supplements the previously certified Specific Plan EIR per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163. This includes changes in the environmental and regulatory setting, potential environmental effects associated with the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update.

On November 20, 2020 the City circulated a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for 30 calendar days to help identify the type of impacts that could result from the Specific Plan update, as well as potential areas of controversy. The NOP was mailed to public agencies (including the State Clearinghouse), organizations, and individuals likely to be interested in the Specific Plan update and its potential impacts, including those who requested to receive notices on the Plan. In addition, the NOP was posted on the City’s website. A public scoping meeting was held on December 3, 2020. Comments received by the City on the NOP and at the public scoping meeting were considered during preparation of the Draft SEIR.

Agenda Packet Page 84 of 263
4 The Draft SEIR was made available for public and agency review on July 19, 2022. Copies of the Notice of Availability (“NOA”) of the Draft SEIR were mailed to public agencies (including the State Clearinghouse (SCH #2014042025)), organizations, and individuals likely to be interested in the Specific Plan update and its potential impacts, including those who requested to receive notices about the Plan. In addition, copies of the Draft SEIR were distributed to public agencies (including the State Clearinghouse). Copies of the Draft SEIR were made available at City Hall, at the El Cerrito Library, and on the City’s website.

A public comment session on the Draft SEIR was held before the Planning Commission on August 17, 2022. The CEQA-mandated 45-day public comment period for the Draft EIR ended on September 2, 2022. All comments on the Draft SEIR concerning environmental issues received during the public comment period were evaluated and responded to in writing by the City as the Lead Agency in accordance with Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines.

The comments on the Draft SEIR, changes to the Draft SEIR, and the written responses were incorporated into a Final SEIR that was published on October 15, 2022. Copies of the Final EIR were made available at City Hall, at the El Cerrito Library, and on the City’s website.

A duly and properly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the Planning Commission of the City of El Cerrito on October 19, 2022, and all persons interested and expressing a desire to comment were heard. The Planning Commission, having fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted, voted affirmatively to recommend to the City Council to certify the Final SEIR.

A duly and properly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the City Council of the City of El Cerrito on November 15, 2022, and all persons interested and expressing a desire to comment were heard.

B. Record of Proceedings and Custodian of Record
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the record of proceedings consists of the following documents and testimony:
(a) The NOP, comments received on the NOP or at the scoping meeting, and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Plan; (b) The Draft San Pablo Specific Plan update released for public review on July 19, 2022 and the revised Draft San Pablo Specific Plan released on October 15, 2022; (c) The Draft SEIR for the Project (July, 19, 2022), appendices to the SEIR, and technical materials cited in the document;
(d) All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public comment period on the Draft SEIR;
(e) The Final SEIR for the Specific Plan update, including comments received on the Draft SEIR, responses to those comments, text revisions to the Draft SEIR, the technical appendices, and technical materials cited in the document, as well as all comments and staff responses entered into the record orally or in writing between July 19, 2022 and September 2, 2022;
Agenda Packet Page 85 of 263
5 (f) The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Plan; (g) All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents related to the Specific Plan update prepared by the City, or consultants to the City with respect to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the Plan;
(h) All documents submitted to the City (including the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission and the City Council) by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the SEIR, up through the close of the public hearing on November 15, 2022;
(i) Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the SEIR; (j) All matters of common knowledge to the Commission and Council, including, but not limited to:
(i) The El Cerrito General Plan and other applicable policies; (ii) The El Cerrito Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances; (iii) The 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan
(iv) The 2014 EIR for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan (v) Information regarding the City’s fiscal status; and (vi) Applicable City policies and regulations; and
(k) Any other materials required for the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e).

The documents described above comprising the record of proceedings are located in the Community Development Department, City of El Cerrito, 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 9453. The custodian of these documents is the Community Development Director or his/her designee.

C. Findings Are Determinative
These City of El Cerrito findings required under CEQA for the Specific Plan update (“Findings”) are the City’s findings under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, §21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000 et seq.) relating to the Specific Plan update. The Findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of the Council regarding the update’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures and project alternatives that, in the Council’s view, justify approval of the Plan update. All mitigation measures listed below in this Findings document are included in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”).

In certifying the Final SEIR, the City Council recognizes that there may be differences in and among the different sources of information and opinions offered in the document and testimony that make up the SEIR and the administrative record; that experts disagree; and that the City Council must base its decision and these findings on the substantial evidence in the record that Agenda Packet Page 86 of 263
6 it finds most compelling. Therefore, by these findings, the City Council ratifies, clarifies, and/or makes insignificant modifications to the SEIR and resolves that these findings shall control and are determinative of the significant impacts of the Project.

The mitigation measures proposed in the SEIR have been adopted and included in the MMRP, substantially in the form proposed in the SEIR, with such clarifications and non- substantive modifications as the City Council has deemed appropriate to implement the mitigation measures. The MMRP is expressly incorporated into the Project.

The findings and determinations in this Exhibit A are to be considered as an integrated whole and, whether or not any subdivision of this Exhibit A fails to cross-reference or incorporate by reference any other subdivision of this Exhibit A, any finding or determination required or permitted to be made shall be deemed made if it appears in any portion of this document. All of the text included in this document constitutes findings and determinations, whether or not any particular caption sentence or clause includes a statement to that effect.

Each finding in this Exhibit A is based on the entire record. The omission of any relevant fact from the summary discussions below is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on the omitted fact.

Many of the mitigation measures identified in this Exhibit A may have the effect of mitigating multiple impacts (e.g., conditions imposed primarily to mitigate traffic impacts may also secondarily mitigate air quality impacts, etc.). The City Council has not attempted to exhaustively cross-reference all potential impacts mitigated by a particular mitigation measure; however, any failure to cross-reference shall not be construed as a limitation on the potential scope or effect of any such mitigation measure.

IV. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT

AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
A. SCENIC VISTAS
Aesthetics Impact 4-1: Project Impacts on Scenic Vistas.

Specific Plan implementation could interfere with scenic views of Mt. Tamalpais, the Golden Gate Bridge, the San Francisco skyline, the East Bay Hills, and Albany Hill from public rights-of-way (roadways and sidewalks), the two BART station platforms (El Cerrito Plaza and El Cerrito Del Norte), and areas of lower elevation hillside homes located in El Cerrito and Richmond.

Aesthetics Mitigation 4-1. For future City decision-making actions for individual project proposals under the Specific Plan, Specific Plan Section 2.02 (Administration of Regulating Code) shall be implemented as it applies to the proposal’s potential effect on scenic vistas. The City shall require evaluation (including visual simulations, if deemed necessary) of the proposal’s visual effect as viewed from important on-site and off-site viewpoints, including public rights-of-way of east-west streets (roadways and sidewalks) and the two BART station platforms in the Specific Plan area (El Cerrito Plaza and El Cerrito Del Norte). The evaluation shall address the proposal’s effect on views of Mt. Tamalpais, the Golden Gate Bridge, the San Francisco skyline, the East Bay Hills, and Albany Hill. This mitigation shall be enforceable by its incorporation into the Specific Plan as a City-adopted policy and shall be implemented through subsequent permits, conditions, agreements, or other measures consistent with Specific Plan Section 2.02.

Agenda Packet Page 87 of 263
7 Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 4-1 has been incorporated into the MMRP.

Findings. These impacts and findings have not changed from the 2014 EIR but are hereby restated.

Based upon the Final SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

2. Remaining Impacts: Because the outcome of this decision-making process for any individual, future proposals cannot be guaranteed within the framework of this program SEIR, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

3. Finding. Because the outcome of future decision making process is cannot be guaranteed to work within the framework of the SEIR, No alternative (including the No Project alternative) or additional mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce this impact to a level of insignificance, and as a consequence mitigation to a level of insignificance is infeasible. (14 California Code of Regulations §15091(a)(3)) CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES.

Impact 7-1: Destruction/Degradation of Historic Resources.

There may be one or more properties or features within the plan area that meet the CEQA definition of a historic resource, including properties or features already listed, or properties or features eligible for listing, in a local, State, or Federal register of historic resources. Future development projects that are otherwise consistent with the proposed Specific Plan may cause substantial adverse changes in the significance of one or more such historic resources. Substantial adverse changes that may occur include physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of one or more historic resources or its immediate surroundings such that the resource is "materially impaired." The significance of a historic resource would be considered potentially "materially impaired" when and if an individual future development project proposes to demolish or materially alter the physical characteristics that justify the determination of its significance (CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5[b]).

Mitigation 7-1. For any individual discretionary project within the Specific Plan area that the City determines may involve a property that contains a potentially significant historic resource (e.g., a recorded historic resource or an unrecorded building or structure 50 years or older), the resource shall be evaluated by City staff, and if warranted, shall be assessed by a qualified professional on the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) list of consultants who meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards to determine whether the property is a significant historical resource and whether or not the project may have a potentially significant adverse effect on the historical resource. If, based on the recommendation of the qualified professional, the City determines that the project may have a potentially significant effect, the City shall require the applicant to implement the following mitigation measures: (a) Adhere to one or both of the following Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards:

Agenda Packet Page 88 of 263
8  Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings; or  Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.

The qualified professional shall make a recommendation to the City as to whether the project fully adheres to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and any specific modifications necessary to do so. The final determination as to a project's adherence to the Standards shall be made by the City body with final decision-making authority over the project. Such a determination of individual project adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards will constitute mitigation of the project historic resource impacts to a less than- significant level (CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5).
(b) If measure (a) is not feasible, the historic resource shall be moved to a new location compatible with the original character and use of the historical resource, and its historic features and compatibility in orientation, setting, and general environment shall be retained, such that the resource retains its eligibility for listing on the California Register.

If neither measure (a) nor measure (b) is feasible, a project-specific EIR shall be required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, particularly in order for specific project alternatives to be designed and evaluated. If after that CEQA process, neither measure (a) nor (b) is found to be feasible, then the City shall, as applicable and to the extent feasible, implement the following measures in the following order:
(c) Document the historic resource before any changes that would cause a loss of integrity and loss of continued eligibility. The documentation shall adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation. The level of documentation shall be proportionate with the level of significance of the resource. The documentation shall be made available for inclusion in the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) or the Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) Collections in the Library of Congress, the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), and the Bancroft Library, as well as local libraries and historical societies, such as the El Cerrito Historical Society. (d) Retain and reuse the historic resource to the maximum feasible extent and continue to apply the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to the maximum feasible extent in all alterations, additions, and new construction.
(e) Through careful methods of planned deconstruction to avoid damage and loss, salvage character defining features and materials for educational and interpretive use onsite, or for reuse in new construction on the site in a way that commemorates their original use and significance. (f) Interpret the historical significance of the resource through a permanent exhibit or program in a publicly accessible location on the site or elsewhere within the Specific Plan area.

Implementation of measures (b), (c), (d), (e), and/or (f) would reduce a significant impact on historic resources.

Mitigation Measure HR 7-1 has been incorporated into the MMRP.

Agenda Packet Page 89 of 263
9 Findings. These impacts and findings have not changed from the 2014 EIR but are hereby restated. Based upon the Final SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: Changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the SEIR, although not to a level of insignificance. This SEIR is prohibited from speculating on the details of any future individual development proposal and its potential impact on a historic resource, and the City cannot determine with certainty that this mitigation measure would reduce the potential impact of any individual project on a historic resource to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: The impacts to cultural and historic resources would remain significant and unavoidable.

3. Finding: No alternative (including the No Project alternative) or additional mitigation measure has been identified that would reduce this impact to a level of insignificance, and as a consequence mitigation to a level of insignificance is infeasible. (14 California Code of Regulations §15091(a)(3)).

NOISE
Impact 13-3: Construction Noise.

Businesses and residences would be intermittently exposed to high levels of noise throughout the 2040 plan horizon. Construction would elevate noise levels at adjacent businesses and residences by 15 to 20 dBA or more.

Mitigation 13-3.

Construction equipment shall be well-maintained and used judiciously to be as quiet as practical.

The following measures, when applicable, are recommended to reduce noise from construction activities:
 Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
 Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
 Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as feasible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction area.  Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.  Pre-drill foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile.  Construct solid plywood fences around construction sites adjacent to operational business, residences, or noise sensitive land uses.
 A temporary noise control blanket barrier could be erected, if necessary, along building facades facing construction sites. This mitigation would only be necessary if conflicts occurred which were irresolvable by proper scheduling. Noise control blanket barriers can be rented and quickly erected.

Agenda Packet Page 90 of 263
10  Route construction-related traffic along major roadways and as far as feasible from sensitive receptors
 Ensure that construction activities (including the loading and unloading of materials and truck movements) are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 PM on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM on Saturdays. No construction work is allowed on Sundays and holidays.
 Ensure that excavating, grading, and filling activities (including warming of equipment motors) are limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 PM on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM on Saturdays. No construction work is allowed on Sundays and holidays.
 Businesses, residences, or noise sensitive land uses adjacent to construction sites shall be notified of the construction schedule in writing. Designate a “construction liaison” who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The liaison would address complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures to correct the problem.
 Conspicuously post a telephone number for the liaison at the construction site.

Mitigation Measure NOISE 13-3 has been incorporated into the MMRP.

Findings. These impacts and findings have not changed from the 2014 EIR but are hereby restated. Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: Constraints to daily construction times have been noted and a list of ways to lessen noise impacts have been included. Changes or modifications have been incorporated into the project that lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR, although not to a level of insignificance.

2. Remaining Impacts: The impact of increased noise on businesses and residences during construction is significant and unavoidable.

Impact 13-4: Construction-Related Vibration.

Residences, businesses, and historic structures could be exposed to construction-related vibration during the excavation and foundation work of buildings.

Mitigation 13-4. The following measures are recommended to reduce vibration from construction activities:
 Avoid impact pile driving where possible. Drilled piles cause lower vibration levels where geological conditions permit their use.
 Avoid using vibratory rollers and tampers near sensitive areas.  In areas where project construction is anticipated to include vibration-generating activities, such as pile driving, in close proximity to existing structures, site-specific vibration studies shall be conducted to determine the area of impact and to present appropriate mitigation measures that may include the following:

Agenda Packet Page 91 of 263
11 - Identify sites that would include vibration compaction activities (such as pile driving) and have the potential to generate ground-borne vibration, and the sensitivity of nearby structures to ground-borne vibration.

Vibration limits shall be applied to all vibration-sensitive structures located within 200 feet of the project. A qualified structural engineer should conduct this task. - Develop a vibration monitoring and construction contingency plan to identify structures where monitoring would be conducted, set up a vibration monitoring schedule, define structure specific vibration limits, and address the need to conduct photo, elevation, and crack surveys to document before and after construction conditions.
- Design construction contingencies that would be implemented when vibration levels approached the limits.
- At a minimum, conduct vibration monitoring during initial demolition activities and during pile driving activities. Monitoring results may indicate the need for more or less intensive measurements.
- When vibration levels approach limits, suspend construction and implement contingencies to either lower vibration levels or secure the affected structures.  Conduct post-construction survey on structures under either of these circumstances: (a) when construction monitoring has indicated high vibration levels or (b) when complaints of damage have been made due to construction activities. Make appropriate repairs or compensation when damage has resulted from construction activities.

Mitigation Measure Noise 13-4 has been incorporated into the MMRP.

Findings. These impacts and findings have not changed from the 2014 EIR but are hereby restated. Based upon the Final SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: Changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project that lessens the significant environmental effects identified in the SEIR, although not to a level of insignificance. Even with the above mitigation measures it may not be possible to avoid using pile drivers, vibratory rollers, and tampers entirely during construction facilitated by the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update. Due to the density of development in the area, some of these activities may take place near sensitive areas. In these cases, the mitigation measures listed above may not be sufficient to reduce groundborne vibrations below a level of significance.

2. Remaining Impacts: The Specific Plan update would have a significant and unavoidable impact resulting from construction related vibration.

3. Finding: No alternative (including the No Project alternative) or additional mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce this impact to a level of insignificance, and as a consequence mitigation to a level of insignificance is infeasible. (14 California Code of Regulations § 15091(a) (3)) V. FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AVOIDED OR MITIGATED TO

A LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
Potentially significant impacts of the Specific Plan are listed below with applicable mitigation measures, all of which are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. For each of Agenda Packet Page 92 of 263
12 the impacts listed, the City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in the Specific Plan, through the adoption of the MMRP, to mitigate or avoid the significant impacts on the environment (14 California Code of Regulations §15091(a)(1)), as described in this Section V.

A. AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Impact 4-2: Project Light and Glare Impacts.

The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan anticipates development on the surface parking lots around the El Cerrito Plaza and El Cerrito Del Norte BART stations. As part of this development, new parking structures for the BART stations and for other new development are anticipated. These parking structures may result in light and glare from vehicles using the parking structure at night. In addition, future multi-story buildings (or renovations) in the Specific Plan area, if faced in reflective materials (e.g., reflective glass), could result in glare impacts on adjacent and nearby properties.

Mitigation 4-2. Project developers (including but not limited to BART) shall install landscaping and incorporate other measures into and around any Specific Plan area future parking structure(s) (light source shielding, etc.) as necessary to ensure that potential light and glare from vehicles would be avoided toward the Ohlone Greenway, residential uses, and other sensitive uses, consistent with El Cerrito City Resolution 82-9 and the El Cerrito design review process.

Regarding reflective building materials, for all future development in the Specific Plan area, facades shall be of non-reflective materials, and windows shall incorporate non- reflective coating.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) and it will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the utilizing the design review process and requiring facades to be constructed from nonreflective materials will cause the impact to be less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measure.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts related to impacts of light and glare would not be significant.

Impact 5-1: Construction Period Emissions. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in short-term emissions from construction activities associated with subsequent development, including site grading, asphalt paving, building construction, and architectural coating. Emissions commonly associated with construction activities include fugitive dust from soil disturbance, fuel combustion from mobile heavy-duty diesel- and gasoline- powered equipment, portable auxiliary equipment, and worker commute trips. During construction, fugitive dust, the dominant source of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions, is generated when wheels or blades disturb surface materials.

Although construction activities at individual project sites are expected to occur during a relatively short time period, the combination of temporary dust from activities and diesel exhaust from construction equipment poses both a health and nuisance impact to nearby receptors. In addition, NOX emissions during grading and soil import/export for large projects may exceed the BAAQMD NOX emission thresholds.

Mitigation 5-1. Implement the following BAAQMD-recommended measures to control particulate matter emissions during construction. These measures would reduce diesel particulate matter and PM10 from construction to ensure that short-term health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors are avoided or reduced:

Dust (PM10) Control Measures:
 Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to residences should be kept damp at all times.  Cover all hauling trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard.  Pave, apply water at least twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas.
 Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas and sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is deposited onto the adjacent roads.
 Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (i.e., previously graded areas that are inactive for 10 days or more).  Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.  Limit traffic speeds on any unpaved roads to 5 mph.
 Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.  Suspend construction activities that cause visible dust plumes to extend beyond the construction site.
 Post a publically visible sign(s) with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
 Additional Measures to Reduce Diesel Particulate Matter and PM2.5 and other construction emissions:
- The developer or contractor shall provide a plan for approval by the City or BAAQMD demonstrating that the heavy-duty (>50 horsepower) off-road vehicles to be used in the Agenda Packet Page 94 of 263
14 construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet- average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent CARB fleet average for the year 2011. - Clear signage at all construction sites shall be posted indicating that diesel and gasoline equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials.

Rotating drum concrete trucks could keep their engines running continuously as long as they were on-site or adjacent to the construction site. - The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors). - Maintain written logs on site and available for review showing the maintenance of all gasoline and diesel engines on site to ensure low emissions.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated in the MMRP. The City finds that implementing the following BAAQMD-recommended measures to control particulate matter emissions during construction will reduce the impacts caused by diesel particulate matter and PM10 to ensure that short-term health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors are to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts related to impacts of diesel particulate matter and PM10 would not be significant.

Impact 5-2: Impacts of Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) on Sensitive Receptors.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in the potential construction of a variety of projects. This construction would result in short-term emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM), a TAC. Construction would result in the generation of DPM emissions from the use of off-road diesel equipment required for site grading and excavation, paving, and other construction activities. The amount to which the receptors are exposed (a function of concentration and duration of exposure) is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Health-related risks associated with diesel-exhaust emissions are primarily linked to long- term exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer. The calculation of cancer risk associated with exposure to TACs is typically based on a 70-year period of exposure. The use of dieselpowered construction equipment, however, would be temporary and episodic and would occur over a relatively large area. Cancer risk and PM2.5 exposure would have to be analyzed through project-level analysis to identify the potential for significant impacts and measures to reduce those impacts to less-than-significant.

Mitigation 5-2. Require project-level construction health risk assessment. Construction health risk assessment shall be required on a project-by- project basis, either through screening or refined modeling, to identify impacts and, if necessary, include performance standards and industry-recognized measures to reduce exposure. Reduction in health risk can be accomplished through, though is not limited to, the following measures:
 Construction equipment selection;
Agenda Packet Page 95 of 263
15  Use of alternative fuels and engine retrofits, temporary line power or electric equipment;
 Modified construction schedule; and
 Implementation of BAAQMD Basic and/or Additional Construction Mitigation Measures for control of fugitive dust.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated in the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement for a project-level construction health risk assessment is feasible and will reduce the impacts of TACs of sensitive receptors during construction to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts related to impacts of TACs of sensitive receptors during construction would not be significant.

Impact 5-3: Toxic Air Contaminant Exposure - Long-Term Operations.

The Specific Plan would allow growth of new residential land uses that could include sensitive receptors, as well as new non-residential land uses that would be potential new emissions sources.

Typically, these sources would be evaluated through the project-specific BAAQMD permit process or the CEQA process to identify and mitigate any significant exposures. However, some sources that would not be required to undergo such a review, such as truck loading docks or truck parking areas, may have the potential to cause significant increases in TAC exposure. While average daily traffic along Specific Plan area surface streets is not readily available, the roadway screening analysis tables indicate that health risk from high volume surface streets such as Central Avenue, Carlson Boulevard, and Potrero Avenue would be less-than- significant at average daily traffic volumes (ADT) of 40,000 vehicles or less at a distance of 10 feet. If projects under the Specific Plan are located within close proximity to surface streets with daily traffic volumes higher than 40,000 ADT this would represent a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation 5-3. Implement the following measures in site planning and building designs to reduce TAC and PM2.5 exposure where new receptors are located within the overlay distances identified above:
 Future development under the Specific Plan that includes sensitive receptors (such as schools, hospitals, daycare centers, or retirement homes) located within the overlay distances from highways and stationary sources shall require site-specific analysis to determine the level of TAC and PM2.5 exposure, or for projects located near surface streets with daily traffic volumes exceeding 40,000 ADT. This analysis shall be conducted following procedures outlined by BAAQMD. If the site- specific analysis reveals significant exposures, such as cancer risk greater than 10 in one million or cumulative cancer risk greater than 100 in one million, additional measures shall be employed to reduce the risk to below the threshold. If this is not possible, the sensitive receptors shall be relocated.

Agenda Packet Page 96 of 263
16  Future non-residential developments would be evaluated through the CEQA process or BAAQMD permit process to ensure that they do not cause a significant health risk in terms of excess cancer risk greater than 10 in one million, acute or chronic hazards with a Hazard greater than 1.0, or annual PM2.5 exposures greater than 0.3 µg/m3, or a significant cumulative health risk in terms of excess cancer risk greater than 100 in one million, acute or chronic hazards with a Hazard Index greater than 10.0 or annual PM2.5 exposures greater than 0.8 µg/m3.
 For significant cancer risk exposure, as defined by BAAQMD, indoor air filtration systems shall be installed to effectively reduce particulate levels to a less-than-significant level.

Project sponsors shall submit performance specifications and design details to demonstrate that lifetime residential exposures would result in less-than- significant cancer risks (less than 10 in one million chances or 100 in one million for cumulative sources).  Air filtration systems installed shall be rated MERV-13 or higher, and a maintenance plan for the air filtration system shall be implemented.
 Trees and/or vegetation shall be planted between sensitive receptors and pollution sources, if feasible. Trees that are best- suited to trapping particulate matter shall be planted, including the following: Pine (Pinus nigra var. maritime), Cypress (X Cupressocyparis leylandii), Hybrid popular (Populus deltoids X trichocarpa), and Redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens).
 Sites shall be designed to locate sensitive receptors as far as possible from any freeways, roadways, diesel generators, distribution centers, and rail lines.  Operable windows, balconies, and building air intakes shall be located as far away from these sources as feasible. If near a distribution center, residents shall not be located immediately adjacent to a loading dock or where trucks concentrate to deliver goods.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated in the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement for the following measures in site planning and building designs will reduce the impacts of TACs to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining long term impacts related to TACs would not be significant.

B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 6-1: Potential Impacts on Nesting Birds and Roosting Bats.

The Specific Plan is intended to improve and expand the natural environment in the Specific Plan area, including the use of native and drought-tolerant plants (a beneficial environmental measure). Without a proactive mitigation procedure in place, Specific Plan implementation could inadvertently result in the removal of existing trees containing nests or eggs of migratory birds, raptors, or bird species during the nesting season, which would be considered an "unlawful take" Agenda Packet Page 97 of 263
17 under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and USFW provisions protecting migratory and nesting birds. In addition, roosting bats, several species of which are protected under the federal and State Endangered Species Acts, might be disturbed.

Mitigation 6-1. (1) The removal of trees, shrubs, or weedy vegetation shall be avoided during the February 1 through August 31 bird nesting period to the extent possible. If no vegetation or tree removal is proposed during the nesting period, no further action is required. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, the project applicant shall retain a qualified wildlife biologist to conduct a survey for nesting birds no sooner than 14 days prior to the start of removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation, buildings, grading, or other construction activity. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey; therefore, if vegetation or building removal is not started within 21 days of the survey, another survey shall be required. The area surveyed shall include all construction sites, access roads, and staging areas, as well as areas within 150 feet outside the boundaries of the areas to be cleared or as otherwise determined by the biologist.

In the event that an active nest is discovered in the areas to be cleared, or in other habitats within 150 feet of construction boundaries, clearing and construction shall be postponed for at least two weeks or until a wildlife biologist has determined that the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts. 2) A qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for bats and suitable bat roosting habitat at work sites where culverts, structures and/or trees would be removed or otherwise disturbed prior to the initiation of construction. If bats or suitable bat roosting habitat is detected, CDFW shall be notified immediately for consultation and possible on-site monitoring.

Actions (1) and (2) can be implemented simultaneously.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the pre-construction surveys and measures for the avoidance of active nests and bats are feasible and will reduce potential impacts to nesting birds and bats to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts to nesting birds and bats would not be significant.

C. CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
Impact 7-2: Potential for Disturbance of Buried Archaeological Resources, Including Human Remains.

Development facilitated by the Specific Plan could disturb unrecorded sensitive archaeological resources in the plan area.

Mitigation 7-2. During the City’s standard project-specific environmental checklist review process for all future, discretionary, public improvement and private development projects in the Specific Plan area, the City shall determine the possible presence of, and the potential impacts of Agenda Packet Page 98 of 263
18 the action on, archaeological resources. For discretionary projects involving substantial ground disturbance (more than 10,000 square feet), the City shall require individual project applicants or environmental consultants to contact the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to determine whether the particular project is located in a sensitive area. Future discretionary development projects that CHRIS determines may be located in a sensitive area--i.e., on or adjoining an identified archaeological site--shall proceed only after the project applicant contracts with a qualified archaeologist to conduct a determination in regard to cultural values remaining on the site and warranted mitigation measures.

In general, to make an adequate determination in these instances, the archaeologist shall conduct a preliminary field inspection to (1) assess the amount and location of visible ground surface, (2) determine the nature and extent of previous impacts, and (3) assess the nature and extent of potential impacts. Such field inspection may demonstrate the need for some form of additional subsurface testing (e.g., excavation by auger, shovel, or backhoe unit) or, alternatively, the need for on-site monitoring of subsurface activities (i.e., during grading or trenching).

Preservation may be accomplished by:
 Planning construction to avoid the archaeological site;  Incorporating the site within a park, green space, or other open space element;  Covering the site with a layer of chemically stable soil; or  Deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement.

When in-place mitigation is determined by the City to be infeasible, a data recovery plan, which makes provisions for adequate recovery of culturally or historically consequential information about the site, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken. Such studies shall be submitted to the CHRIS Northwest Information Center. If Native American artifacts are indicated, the studies shall also be submitted to the Native American Heritage Commission.

Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on form DPR 422(archaeological sites).

Mitigation measures recommended by these two groups and required by the City shall be undertaken, if necessary, prior to and during construction activities.

A data recovery plan and data recovery shall not be required if the City determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the necessary data, provided that the data have already been documented in an EIR or are available for review at the CHRIS Northwest Information Center (CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4[b]).

In the event that subsurface cultural resources are otherwise encountered during approved ground-disturbing activities for a plan area construction activity, work in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds following the procedures described above. Project personnel shall not collect cultural resources.

Agenda Packet Page 99 of 263
19 If human remains are found, special rules set forth in State Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 and CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(b) shall apply.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigations have been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement for a site- specific cultural resources study and technical report meeting state and federal requirements performed by a qualified archaeologist or equivalent cultural resources professional and treatment plans for identified resources as well as resources discovered during construction are feasible and will reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts to archaeological resources would not be significant.

Impact 7-3: Potential for Disturbance of Paleontological Resources.

Development facilitated by the Specific Plan could disturb unrecorded paleontological resources in the plan area.

Mitigation 7-3. During the City’s standard project-specific environmental checklist review process for all future, discretionary, public improvement and private development projects in the Specific Plan area, the City shall determine the possible presence of, and the potential impacts of the action on, paleontological resources. For projects involving substantial ground disturbance (more than 10,000 square feet), the City shall require individual project applicants to carry out the following measures:
(1) Education Program. Project applicants shall implement a program that includes the following elements:
 Resource identification training procedures for construction personnel;  Spot-checks by a qualified paleontological monitor of all excavations deeper than seven feet below ground surface; and
 Procedures for reporting discoveries and their geologic context. (2) Procedures for Resources Encountered. If subsurface paleontological resources are encountered, excavation shall halt in the vicinity of the resources, and the project paleontologist shall evaluate the resource and its stratigraphic context. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. During monitoring, if potentially significant paleontological resources are found, “standard” samples shall be collected and processed by a qualified paleontologist to recover micro vertebrate fossils. If significant fossils are found and collected, they shall be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix shall be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized catalogs of material Agenda Packet Page 100 of 263
20 collected and identified shall be provided to a local museum repository with the specimens.

Significant fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, shall be deposited in a local museum repository for permanent curatorship and storage. A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities, and the significance of the fossils, if any, shall be prepared. The report and inventory, when submitted to the City, shall signify the completion of the program to mitigate impacts on paleontological resources.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement to educate earth moving crews on the appearance of fossils, procedures to follow if any are discovered, and ensuring that a paleontologist assess the significance of any fossil find, and recovers it, if appropriate are feasible and would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to a less-than- significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts to paleontological resources would not be significant.

Supplemental Impact 7-1: Impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources.

Development facilitated by the Specific Plan Update could disturb unrecorded sensitive archaeological resources which qualify as Tribal Cultural Resources in the Plan Update Area.

Supplemental Mitigation 7-1.

During ground-disturbing construction activities, if archaeological resources are encountered which are, or appear to be, Native American in origin, these artifacts (“tribal finds”) shall be presumed to be significant Tribal Cultural Resources pursuant to PRC 21074. Certified 2014 EIR Mitigation 7- 2 (see above) shall apply. In addition to implementation of Certified EIR Mitigation 7-2, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted to identify the appropriate tribal contact(s). The identified contact(s) shall be informed of the find, and the City will invite the representative(s) for consultation while seeking to avoid damaging effects on the resource, and to define a data recovery plan (if required). The City shall also retain a qualified archaeologist for joint consultation with the tribal representative(s). The City, pursuant to PRC 21074, in consultation with the appropriate tribe(s) and a qualified archaeologist, shall consider the significance under CEQA of the tribal find, and determine the next appropriate actions based on the consultation.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigations have been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as Agenda Packet Page 101 of 263
21 identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement to notify appropriate tribal contacts and engage in consultation if tribal finds are encountered will reduce potential impacts to tribal resources to a less-than-significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts to tribal resources would not be significant.

D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 8-1: Potential Ground Instability Impacts. The potential for ground instability can depend on specific, highly localized underlying soil conditions. Determination of liquefaction, differential settlement, lateral spreading, and subsidence potential in the Specific Plan area would require site-specific geotechnical studies for future individual development proposals. Possible ground instability conditions, if not properly engineered for, could result in associated significant damage to project buildings and other improvements.

Mitigation 8-1. Subject to City review and approval, complete and implement the geotechnical mitigation recommendations identified in the required site-specific geotechnical investigations and engineering studies, in coordination with City grading permit and building permit performance standards.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement for site-specific geotechnical investigations and engineering studies would reduce potential impacts related to geologic stability to a less-than- significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts related to geologic stability resources would not be significant.

E. NOISE
Impact 13-1: Noise and Land Use Compatibility. Residential land uses facilitated by the Specific Plan would be exposed to exterior noise levels exceeding 60 dBA Ldn from traffic noise and 70 dBA Ldn from BART noise. Future noise levels would exceed El Cerrito’s noise and land use compatibility standards.

Mitigation 13-1. Future development would be exposed to outdoor noise levels exceeding acceptable levels as defined in the El Cerrito General Plan. Noise levels inside residential structures proposed in such noise environments would exceed 45 dBA Ldn, the local established land use compatibility threshold. In areas where residential developments would be exposed to an Ldn of greater than 60 dBA, El Cerrito General Plan Policy H3.9 requires the evaluation of mitigation measures for specific projects.

Agenda Packet Page 102 of 263
22  Utilize site planning to minimize noise in residential outdoor activity areas (shared outdoor space in multi-family developments) by locating the areas behind noise barriers, the buildings, in courtyards, or orienting the terraces to alleyways rather than streets, whenever possible. The goal is a maximum noise level of 60 dBA Ldn from roadway traffic and 70 dBA Ldn from BART noise.

The City of El Cerrito requires project-specific acoustical analyses to achieve interior noise levels of 45 dBA Ldn or lower, and the adopted instantaneous noise levels in residential units exposed to exterior noise levels greater than 60 dBA Ldn should not exceed 50 dBA Lmax in bedrooms and 55 dBA Lmax in other rooms. Building sound insulation requirements would need to include the provision of forced-air mechanical ventilation in noise environments exceeding 60 dBA Ldn so that windows could be kept closed at the occupant’s discretion to control noise. Special building construction techniques (e.g., sound rated windows and building facade treatments) may be required where exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA Ldn. These treatments include, but are not limited to, sound rated windows and doors, sound rated exterior wall assemblies, acoustical caulking, etc. The specific determination of what treatments are necessary will be conducted on a unit-by-unit basis during project design. Results of the analysis, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, will be submitted to the City, along with the building plans, which shall be revised as necessary or approved prior to issuance of a building permit. Feasible construction techniques such as these would adequately reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA Ldn or lower and meet instantaneous noise limits.
 Similar to above, noise insulation features shall be considered on a case-by-case basis for noise- sensitive offices and commercial uses proposed where noise levels exceed 65 dBA Ldn, in order to meet adopted noise standards.

Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR. The City finds that the requirement for site-specific consideration outside noise levels and appropriate requirement of projectspecific acoustical analyses would reduce potential impacts to noise and land use compatibility to a less-than- significant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts to noise and land use compatibility resources would not be significant.

Impact 13-2: Commercial Development Noise. The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan would introduce commercial uses adjacent to residential land uses. Specific tenants for the commercial uses have not been identified, but uses would probably include retail stores, grocery stores, restaurants, or cafes. New commercial development proposed along with or next to residential development could result in noise levels exceeding City standards. Typical noise levels generated by loading and unloading would be similar to noise levels generated by truck movements on local roadways. Mechanical equipment would also have the potential to generate noise and would be a potential noise impact.

Agenda Packet Page 103 of 263
23 Mitigation 13-2. New commercial development proposed in the same building as or adjacent to residential development could result in noise levels exceeding City standards.  Noise levels at residential property lines from commercial development shall be maintained not in excess of the general plan and municipal code limit for the City of El Cerrito. The approval of the commercial development shall require a noise study demonstrating how the business--including loading docks, refuse areas, and ventilation systems--would meet these requirements and would be consistent with the City’s noise standards.
 Ensure that noise-generating activities, such as maintenance activities and loading and unloading activities are limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM.

Findings. Based upon the SEIR and the entire record before the Planning Commission and City Council, the City Council finds that:

1. Effects of Mitigation: The mitigation has been incorporated into the MMRP and will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR. The City finds that the requirement for approval of commercial development near residences to complete a noise study ensuring that the business would be consistent with the City’s noise standards and reduce potential impacts to commercial development noise to a less-thansignificant level.

2. Remaining Impacts: Any remaining impacts related to commercial development noise would not be significant.

VI. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS
The City Council finds that implementation of the Specific Plan update could result in a net increase in housing and population in the Specific Plan area over existing conditions, as explained in Section 3.6 (Development Capacity Assumptions) and Chapter 14 (Population and Housing) of this SEIR. The net increases through the horizon year of 2040 would be approximately 2,500 residential units. The direct increase in residential units and population could have an indirect economic “multiplier” effect, generating additional employment in the broader region.

No substantial, detrimental, growth-inducing effect is expected. Specific Plan update implementation would not extend roads or infrastructure through undeveloped or low-density areas; one of the main objectives of the Specific Plan update is to facilitate new development efficiently and effectively in an area where roads and infrastructure already exist (see Chapter 3, Project Description). Any future individual development proposals outside the Plan area would require standard local review of associated development applications, including CEQA-mandated development specific environmental review, to ensure that any adverse environmental impacts are adequately addressed. These existing requirements and procedures would be expected to avoid or reduce the potential environmental impacts of such secondary growth inducement associated with the Specific Plan to less-than-significant levels, except where specific CEQA statements of overriding consideration are adopted.

Agenda Packet Page 104 of 263
24 VII. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The potential environmental consequences of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan were analyzed in detail in the 2014 San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan EIR (2014 EIR). After considering a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives, including a No Project alternative, the City chose to adopt the Specific Plan project as proposed. This SEIR is intended to supplement the City-certified 2014 EIR; it is not intended to be a completely new EIR. As required under CEQA Guidelines Section 15163, the scope and content of this supplement to the 2014 EIR is limited to additions and changes necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project as revised.

Consequently, this SEIR addresses only the environmental issues that are raised by the differences between the approved 2014 Specific Plan and the proposed Specific Plan Update project (which includes a Specific Plan Amendment to increase the development cap allowance, expand the 2014 Plan Area, and revise and refine various Plan components to clarify and improve implementation of the Specific Plan). The scope of any further alternatives analysis would therefore be limited to a discussion of alternatives to the proposed Specific Plan Update project that would avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects resulting from the project above and beyond the 2014 EIR alternatives analysis. As discussed in the various SEIR chapters analyzing environmental topics (e.g., Cultural and Historic Resources, Public Services, Transportation and Circulation, Noise, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Geology and Soils), the Specific Plan Update project would not result in (1) a new significant unavoidable impact or (2) a new or substantially more severe significant project impact that could not be mitigated to a less than-significant level, nor would the SEIR mitigation measures create any new secondary environmental impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162). Therefore, no further discussion of alternatives to the proposed Specific Plan Update project is required.

IX. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS RELATED TO

THE PROJECT FINDINGS
The City Council adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project. As discussed in the various SEIR chapters analyzing environmental topics (e.g., Cultural and Historic Resources, Public Services, Transportation and Circulation, Noise, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Geology and Soils), the Project would not result in (1) a new significant unavoidable impact or (2) a new or substantially more severe significant project impact that could not be mitigated to a less than-significant level, nor would the SEIR mitigation measures create any new secondary environmental impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162). The significant unavoidable impacts of the Project remain unchanged from those in the 2014 EIR, with the following exception: Impact 16-1: Cumulative Traffic Impacts (Chapter 16) is no longer a significant unavoidable impact or a cumulative impact for this Project due to the change in metric from Level of Service (LOS)/Multi-Modal Level of Service (MMLOS) in the 2014 EIR to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in the SEIR. After review of the entire administrative record, the City Council finds that, pursuant to CEQA section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines section 15093, specific economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits of the Project outweigh the Project’s unavoidable adverse impacts and the City Council finds that the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts are acceptable in light of the Project’s benefits.

A. Significant Unavoidable Impacts
Agenda Packet Page 105 of 263
25 With respect to the foregoing findings and in recognition of those facts that are included in the entire administrative record, the City has determined that the Project would result in significant unavoidable transportation impacts, as described in Section IV of these Findings.

The City hereby finds that, where possible, changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the Project that substantially lessens the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The project and the MMRP incorporate all feasible mitigation measures to reduce potential environmental impacts to the greatest extent feasible. The City further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that could be imposed or adopted to eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts listed above. These impacts could not be reduced to a less- than-significant level by feasible changes, mitigation measures or alternatives to the Project.

B. Overriding Considerations
The City Council has carefully balanced the benefits of the Project against any adverse impacts identified in the SEIR that could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance. The City Council finds that each of the specific environmental, economic, fiscal, social, housing and other overriding considerations set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for a finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh its significant adverse environmental impacts and is an overriding consideration warranting approval of the Project. With the exception of Impact 16-1 (no longer an impact), the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project remain unchanged from those in the 2014 EIR, and therefore the overriding considerations remain unchanged. The City Council specifically adopts and makes this Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project and the anticipated benefits of the Project.

Substantial evidence in the record demonstrates the City would derive the following substantial public benefits from adoption and implementation of the Project:

1. The Project is the product of a transparent, multi-year process designed to develop community consensus. The Project has benefitted from unprecedented levels of public outreach and participation, and has been informed by appropriate analyses. In addition to large attendance at the community workshops, the Planning Commission and City Council both conducted a detailed and public review of the Draft Specific Plan update and provided clear direction that has been comprehensively addressed. As a result, the Project is reflective of the community’s diverse preferences and goals.

2. The Project will enhance the public realm, through an integrated network of public spaces, including widened sidewalks, plazas and parks, that invites strolling and public gathering and allows for community life, identity and sense of place. The Project’s comprehensive public space network supports a more active, vibrant downtown and healthier living by encouraging walking, biking and social gathering.

3. The Project will create a more active, vibrant urban area, with a mix of commercial and residential uses that complement and support one another and bring vitality, including increased retail sales, to the area. In addition, the Project will establish standards and guidelines that encourage development of underutilized and vacant land on San Pablo Avenue while ensuring a building character that is modulated visually interesting.

Agenda Packet Page 106 of 263
26 4. The Project recognizes and promotes healthy living and activity by encouraging walking, biking and access to transit as alternatives to vehicular use, supported by widened sidewalks and new bicycle facilities; enhanced public spaces; development intensity focusing on the two BART stations; and a greater mix and diversity of uses. The Project takes a comprehensive approach to sustainability and carbon emissions reduction, utilizing standards integrated with best practices and guidelines for both public and private improvements. The Project also encourages context sensitive design.

X. SEVERABILITY
If any term, provision, or portion of these Findings or the application of these Findings to a particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Findings, or their application to other actions related to the Plan, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City.

Agenda Packet Page 107 of 263

Page 1 ends

MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST--SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE The environmental mitigation measures listed in column two below have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts. A completed and signed chart will indicate that each mitigation requirement has been complied with, and that City and state monitoring requirements have been fulfilled with respect to Public Resources Code section 21081.6.

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date

AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Impact 4-1: Project Impacts on
Scenic Vistas. Specific Plan
implementation could interfere with
scenic views of Mt. Tamalpais, the
Golden Gate Bridge, the San Francisco
skyline, the East Bay Hills, and Albany
Hill from public rights-of-way (roadways
and sidewalks), the two BART station
platforms (El Cerrito Plaza and El
Cerrito Del Norte), and areas of lower
elevation hillside homes located in El
Cerrito and Richmond. This is
considered a potentially significant
impact.

Mitigation 4-1. For future City
decision-making actions for individual
project proposals under the Specific
Plan, Specific Plan Section 2.02
(Administration of Regulating Code)
shall be implemented as it applies to
the proposal’s potential effect on
scenic vistas. The City shall require
evaluation (including visual
simulations, if deemed necessary) of
the proposal’s visual effect as viewed
from important on-site and off-site
viewpoints, including public rights-ofway of east-west streets (roadways and sidewalks) and the two BART
station platforms in the Specific Plan
area (El Cerrito Plaza and El Cerrito
Del Norte). The evaluation shall
address the proposal’s effect on views
of Mt. Tamalpais, the Golden Gate
Bridge, the San Francisco skyline, the
East Bay Hills, and Albany Hill. This
mitigation shall be enforceable by its
incorporation into the Specific Plan as
a City-adopted policy and shall be
implemented through subsequent
permits, conditions, agreements, or
other measures consistent with
Specific Plan Section 2.02.

Incorporation of this measure would
reduce the impact on scenic vistas.

However, because the outcome of this
decision-making process for any
individual, future proposal cannot be
guaranteed within the framework of
this program EIR, the impact is
considered significant and
unavoidable.

City; Individual
project applicants
City During individual
project review
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 3 EXHIBIT B
Agenda Packet Page 108 of 263

Page 2 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Impact 4-2: Project Light and Glare
Impacts. The San Pablo Avenue
Specific Plan anticipates development
on the surface parking lots around the El
Cerrito Plaza and El Cerrito Del Norte
BART stations. As part of this
development, new parking structures for
the BART stations and for other new
development are anticipated. These
parking structures may result in light and
glare from vehicles using the parking
structure at night.

In addition, future multi-story buildings
(or renovations) in the Specific Plan
area, if faced in reflective materials
(e.g., reflective glass), could result in
glare impacts on adjacent and nearby
properties.

These impacts related to light and glare
are considered a potentially
significant.

Mitigation 4-2. Project developers
(including but not limited to BART)
shall install landscaping and
incorporate other measures into and
around any Specific Plan area future
parking structure(s) (light source
shielding, etc.) as necessary to ensure
that potential light and glare from
vehicles would be avoided toward the
Ohlone Greenway, residential uses,
and other sensitive uses, consistent
with El Cerrito City Resolution 82-9
and the El Cerrito design review
process. With this requirement
incorporated into the local design
review process, the light and glare
impact of future parking structures
would be less-than-significant.

Regarding reflective building
materials, for all future development in
the Specific Plan area, facades shall
be of non-reflective materials, and
windows shall incorporate nonreflective coating. This requirement would reduce potential glare impacts
of building materials to a less-thansignificant level.

Individual project
applicants
Individual project
applicants
City
City
During individual
project review;
Condition of
occupancy permit
issuance
Condition of
building permit
issuance;
Condition of
occupancy permit
issuance
Agenda Packet Page 109 of 263

Page 3 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date

AIR QUALITY
Impact 5-1: Construction Period
Emissions. Implementation of the
Specific Plan would result in short-term
emissions from construction activities
associated with subsequent
development, including site grading,
asphalt paving, building construction,
and architectural coating. Emissions
commonly associated with construction
activities include fugitive dust from soil
disturbance, fuel combustion from
mobile heavy-duty diesel- and gasolinepowered equipment, portable auxiliary equipment, and worker commute trips.

During construction, fugitive dust, the
dominant source of PM10 and PM2.5
emissions, is generated when wheels or
blades disturb surface materials.

Uncontrolled dust from construction can
become a nuisance and potential health
hazard to those living and working
nearby. Demolition and renovation of
buildings can also generate PM10 and
PM2.5 emissions. Off-road construction
equipment is often diesel-powered and
can be a substantial source of NOX
emissions, in addition to PM10 and PM2.5
emissions. Worker commute trips and
architectural coatings are dominant
sources of ROG emissions. The
BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
do not identify plan-level thresholds that
apply to construction. Although
construction activities at individual
project sites are expected to occur
during a relatively short time period, the
combination of temporary dust from
activities and diesel exhaust from
construction equipment poses both a
health and nuisance impact to nearby
receptors. In addition, NOX emissions
during grading and soil import/export for
large projects may exceed the BAAQMD
Mitigation 5-1. Implement the
following BAAQMD-recommended
measures to control particulate matter
emissions during construction. These
measures would reduce diesel
particulate matter, PM10, and PM2.5
from construction to ensure that shortterm health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors are avoided or
reduced:

Dust (PM10 and PM2.5) Control
Measures:
 Water all active construction
areas at least twice daily and
more often during windy periods.

Active areas adjacent to
residences should be kept damp
at all times.
 Cover all hauling trucks or
maintain at least two feet of
freeboard.
 Pave, apply water at least twice
daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil
stabilizers on all unpaved access
roads, parking areas, and staging
areas.
 Sweep daily (with water
sweepers) all paved access
roads, parking areas, and staging
areas and sweep streets daily
(with water sweepers) if visible
soil material is deposited onto the
adjacent roads.
 Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic)
soil stabilizers to inactive
construction areas (i.e.,
previously graded areas that are
Individual project
applicants
City Condition of
grading permit
issuance;
Condition of
building permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading and
construction
Agenda Packet Page 110 of 263

Page 4 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
NOX emission thresholds. Without
application of appropriate control
measures to reduce construction dust
and exhaust, construction period
impacts would be considered a
potentially significant impact.
inactive for 10 days or more).
 Enclose, cover, water twice daily,
or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to
exposed stockpiles.
 Limit traffic speeds on any
unpaved roads to 15 mph.
 Replant vegetation in disturbed
areas as quickly as possible.
 Suspend construction activities
that cause visible dust plumes to
extend beyond the construction
site.
 Post a publically visible sign(s)
with the telephone number and
person to contact at the Lead
Agency regarding dust
complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Air
District’s phone number shall also
be visible to ensure compliance
with applicable regulations.

Additional Measures to Reduce Diesel
Particulate Matter and PM2.5 and other
construction emissions:
 The developer or contractor shall
provide a plan for approval by the
City or BAAQMD demonstrating
that the heavy-duty (>50
horsepower) off-road vehicles to
be used in the construction
project, including owned, leased
and subcontractor vehicles, will
achieve a project wide fleetaverage 20 percent NOX
reduction and 45 percent
Agenda Packet Page 111 of 263

Page 5 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
particulate reduction compared to
the most recent CARB fleet
average for the year 2011.
 Clear signage at all construction
sites shall be posted indicating
that diesel and gasoline
equipment standing idle for more
than five minutes shall be turned
off. This would include trucks
waiting to deliver or receive soil,
aggregate, or other bulk
materials. Rotating drum
concrete trucks could keep their
engines running continuously as
long as they were on-site or
adjacent to the construction site.
 The contractor shall install
temporary electrical service
whenever possible to avoid the
need for independently powered
equipment (e.g., compressors).
 Properly tune and maintain
equipment for low emissions.

Implementation of these measures
would reduce project constructionrelated air quality impacts to a lessthan-significant level.

Agenda Packet Page 112 of 263

Page 6 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Impact 5-2: Impacts of Toxic Air
Contaminants (TACs) on Sensitive
Receptors. Implementation of the
Specific Plan would result in the
potential construction of a variety of
projects. This construction would result
in short-term emissions of diesel
particulate matter (DPM), a TAC.

Construction would result in the
generation of DPM emissions from the
use of off-road diesel equipment
required for site grading and excavation,
paving, and other construction activities.

The amount to which the receptors are
exposed (a function of concentration
and duration of exposure) is the primary
factor used to determine health risk (i.e.,
potential exposure to TAC emission
levels that exceed applicable
standards). Health-related risks
associated with diesel-exhaust
emissions are primarily linked to longterm exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer. The calculation of
cancer risk associated with exposure to
TACs is typically based on a 70-year
period of exposure. The use of dieselpowered construction equipment, however, would be temporary and
episodic and would occur over a
relatively large area. Cancer risk and
PM2.5 exposure would have to be
analyzed through project-level analysis
to identify the potential for significant
impacts and measures to reduce those
impacts to less-than-significant. Health
risks associated with temporary
construction would, therefore, be
considered a potentially significant
impact.

Mitigation 5-2. Require project-level
construction health risk assessment.

Construction health risk assessment
shall be required on a project-byproject basis, either through screening or refined modeling, to identify impacts
and, if necessary, include
performance standards and industryrecognized measures to reduce exposure. Reduction in health risk
can be accomplished through, though
is not limited to, the following
measures:
 Construction equipment selection;
 Use of alternative fuels and
engine retrofits, temporary line
power or electric equipment;
 Modified construction schedule;
and
 Implementation of BAAQMD
Basic and/or Additional
Construction Mitigation Measures
for control of fugitive dust.

Implementation of these industryrecognized measures would reduce TAC construction impacts to a lessthan-significant level.

Individual project
applicants
City During individual
project review
(health risk
assessment);
Condition of
grading permit
issuance;
Condition of
building permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading and
construction
Agenda Packet Page 113 of 263

Page 7 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 6-1: Potential Impacts on
Nesting Birds and Roosting Bats.

The Specific Plan is intended to improve
and expand the natural environment in
the Specific Plan area, including the use
of native and drought-tolerant plants (a
beneficial environmental measure).

Without a proactive mitigation procedure
in place, Specific Plan implementation
could inadvertently result in the removal
of existing trees containing nests or
eggs of migratory birds, raptors, or bird
species during the nesting season,
which would be considered an "unlawful
take" under the Federal Migratory Bird
Treaty Act and USFW provisions
protecting migratory and nesting birds.

In addition, roosting bats, several
species of which are protected under
the federal and State Endangered
Species Acts, might be disturbed. This
is considered a potentially significant
impact.

Mitigation 6-1. (1) The removal of
trees, shrubs, or weedy vegetation
shall be avoided during the February 1
through August 31 bird nesting period
to the extent possible. If no vegetation
or tree removal is proposed during the
nesting period, no further action is
required. If it is not feasible to avoid
the nesting period, the project
applicant shall retain a qualified
wildlife biologist to conduct a survey
for nesting birds no sooner than 14
days prior to the start of removal of
trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation,
buildings, grading, or other
construction activity. Survey results
shall be valid for 21 days following the
survey; therefore, if vegetation or
building removal is not started within
21 days of the survey, another survey
shall be required. The area surveyed
shall include all construction sites,
access roads, and staging areas, as
well as areas within 150 feet outside
the boundaries of the areas to be
cleared or as otherwise determined by
the biologist.

Implementation of this measure would
reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level.

Individual project
applicants
City Condition of
grading permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading
Agenda Packet Page 114 of 263

Page 8 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
(2) A qualified biologist shall conduct
pre-construction surveys for bats and
suitable bat roosting habitat at work
sites where culverts, structures and/or
trees would be removed or otherwise
disturbed prior to the initiation of
construction. If bats or suitable bat
roosting habitat is detected, CDFW
shall be notified immediately for
consultation and possible on-site
monitoring. Implementation of this
measure would reduce the impact to a
less-than-significant level.

Actions (1) and (2) can be
implemented simultaneously.

Individual project
applicants
City Condition of
grading permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading
Agenda Packet Page 115 of 263

Page 9 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date

CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
Impact 7-1: Destruction/Degradation
of Historic Resources. There may be
one or more properties or features
within the plan area that meet the CEQA
definition of a historic resource,
including properties or features already
listed, or properties or features eligible
for listing, in a local, State, or Federal
register of historic resources. Future
development projects that are otherwise
consistent with the proposed Specific
Plan may cause substantial adverse
changes in the significance of one or
more such historic resources.

Substantial adverse changes that may
occur include physical demolition,
destruction, relocation, or alteration of
one or more historic resources or its
immediate surroundings such that the
resource is "materially impaired." The
significance of a historic resource would
be considered potentially "materially
impaired" when and if an individual
future development project proposes to
demolish or materially alter the physical
characteristics that justify the
determination of its significance (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5[b]). Such
adverse changes in the significance of a
CEQA-defined historic resource would
be a significant impact.

Mitigation 7-1. For any individual
discretionary project within the Specific
Plan area that the City determines may
involve a property that contains a
potentially significant historic resource
(e.g., a recorded historic resource or an
unrecorded building or structure 50
years or older), the resource shall be
evaluated by City staff, and if warranted,
shall be assessed by a qualified
professional on the California Historical
Resources Information System (CHRIS)
list of consultants who meet the
Secretary of the Interior's Professional
Qualifications Standards to determine
whether the property is a significant
historical resource and whether or not
the project may have a potentially
significant adverse effect on the
historical resource. If, based on the
recommendation of the qualified
professional, the City determines that
the project may have a potentially
significant effect, the City shall require
the applicant to implement the following
mitigation measures:
(a) Adhere to one or both of the
following Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards:
 Secretary of Interior's Standards
for the Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines for
Preserving, Rehabilitating,
Restoring, and Reconstructing
Historic Buildings; or
 Secretary of Interior's Standards
for Rehabilitation and Guidelines
for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.

City; Individual
project applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
grading permit
issuance;
Condition of
building permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading and
construction;
Condition of
occupancy permit
issuance
Agenda Packet Page 116 of 263

Page 10 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
The qualified professional shall make a
recommendation to the City as to
whether the project fully adheres to the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards,
and any specific modifications
necessary to do so. The final
determination as to a project's
adherence to the Standards shall be
made by the City body with final
decision-making authority over the
project. Such a determination of
individual project adherence to the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards will
constitute mitigation of the project
historic resource impacts to a lessthan-significant level (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5).
(b) If measure (a) is not feasible, the
historic resource shall be moved to a
new location compatible with the original
character and use of the historical
resource, and its historic features and
compatibility in orientation, setting, and
general environment shall be retained,
such that the resource retains its
eligibility for listing on the California
Register.

Agenda Packet Page 117 of 263

Page 11 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
(c) Document the historic resource
before any changes that would cause a
loss of integrity and loss of continued
eligibility. The documentation shall
adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Architectural and
Engineering Documentation. The level
of documentation shall be proportionate
with the level of significance of the
resource. The documentation shall be
made available for inclusion in the
Historic American Building Survey
(HABS) or the Historic American
Engineering Record (HAER) Collections
in the Library of Congress, the California
Historical Resources Information
System (CHRIS), and the Bancroft
Library, as well as local libraries and
historical societies, such as the El
Cerrito Historical Society.
(d) Retain and reuse the historic
resource to the maximum feasible
extent and continue to apply the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to
the maximum feasible extent in all
alterations, additions, and new
construction.
(e) Through careful methods of planned
deconstruction to avoid damage and
loss, salvage character-defining features
and materials for educational and
interpretive use on-site, or for reuse in
new construction on the site in a way
that commemorates their original use
and significance.
(f) Interpret the historical significance of
the resource through a permanent
exhibit or program in a publicly
accessible location on the site or
elsewhere within the Specific Plan area.

Agenda Packet Page 118 of 263

Page 12 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Implementation of measures (b), (c), (d),
(e), and/or (f) would reduce a significant
impact on historic resources. However,
this program EIR is prohibited from
speculating on the details of any future
individual development proposal and its
potential impact on a historic resource,
and the City cannot determine with
certainty that this mitigation measure
would reduce the potential impact of any
individual project on a historic resource
to a less-than-significant level.

Consequently, this impact may remain
significant and unavoidable.

Impact 7-2: Potential for Disturbance
of Buried Archaeological Resources,
Including Human Remains.

Development facilitated by the Specific
Plan could disturb unrecorded sensitive
archaeological resources in the plan
area. This possibility represents a
potentially significant impact.

Mitigation 7-2. During the City’s
standard project-specific environmental
checklist review process for all future,
discretionary, public improvement and
private development projects in the
Specific Plan area, the City shall
determine the possible presence of, and
the potential impacts of the action on,
archaeological resources. For
discretionary projects involving
substantial ground disturbance (more
than 10,000 square feet), the City shall
require individual project applicants or
environmental consultants to contact the
California Historical Resources
Information System (CHRIS) to
determine whether the particular project
is located in a sensitive area. Future
discretionary development projects that
CHRIS determines may be located in a
sensitive area--i.e., on or adjoining an
identified archaeological site--shall
proceed only after the project applicant
contracts with a qualified archaeologist
to conduct a determination in regard to
cultural values remaining on the site and
warranted mitigation measures.

In general, to make an adequate
determination in these instances, the
City; Individual
project applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
grading permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading
Agenda Packet Page 119 of 263

Page 13 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
archaeologist shall conduct a
preliminary field inspection to (1) assess
the amount and location of visible
ground surface, (2) determine the nature
and extent of previous impacts, and (3)
assess the nature and extent of
potential impacts. Such field inspection
may demonstrate the need for some
form of additional subsurface testing
(e.g., excavation by auger, shovel, or
backhoe unit) or, alternatively, the need
for on-site monitoring of subsurface
activities (i.e., during grading or
trenching).

If a significant archaeological resource
is identified through this field inspection
process, the City and project applicant
shall seek to avoid damaging effects on
the resource. Preservation in place to
maintain the relationship between the
artifact(s) and the archaeological
context is the preferred manner of
mitigating impacts on an archaeological
site. Preservation may be accomplished
by:
 Planning construction to avoid the
archaeological site;
 Incorporating the site within a park,
green space, or other open space
element;
 Covering the site with a layer of
chemically stable soil; or
 Deeding the site into a permanent
conservation easement.

When in-place mitigation is determined
by the City to be infeasible, a data
recovery plan, which makes provisions
for adequate recovery of culturally or
Agenda Packet Page 120 of 263

Page 14 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
historically consequential information
about the site, shall be prepared and
adopted prior to any excavation being
undertaken. Such studies shall be
submitted to the CHRIS Northwest
Information Center. If Native American
artifacts are indicated, the studies shall
also be submitted to the Native
American Heritage Commission.

Identified cultural resources shall be
recorded on form DPR 422
(archaeological sites). Mitigation
measures recommended by these two
groups and required by the City shall be
undertaken, if necessary, prior to and
during construction activities.

A data recovery plan and data recovery
shall not be required if the City
determines that testing or studies
already completed have adequately
recovered the necessary data, provided
that the data have already been
documented in an EIR or are available
for review at the CHRIS Northwest
Information Center (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.4[b]).

In the event that subsurface cultural
resources are otherwise encountered
during approved ground-disturbing
activities for a plan area construction
activity, work in the immediate vicinity
shall be stopped and a qualified
archaeologist retained to evaluate the
finds following the procedures described
above. Project personnel shall not
collect cultural resources.

If human remains are found, special
rules set forth in State Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.4(b) shall
Agenda Packet Page 121 of 263

Page 15 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
apply.

Implementation of this measure would
reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level.

Supplemental Impact 7-1: Impacts on
Tribal Cultural Resources.

Development facilitated by the Specific
Plan Update could disturb unrecorded
sensitive archaeological resources
which qualify as Tribal Cultural
Resources in the Plan Update Area.

Additionally, resources could be
disturbed that are associated with
Native American activity which would
not normally be considered significant
resources under CEQA, such as nonunique archaeological resources. These resources have the potential to be
significant to a Native American Tribe
and, therefore, could be considered
Tribal Cultural Resources. Such
resources are considered significant
under CEQA. These possibilities
represent a potentially significant
impact. This is a new impact not
identified in the 2014 Specific Plan EIR
because this new CEQA criterion was
added after the 2014 EIR was certified.

Supplemental Mitigation 7-1. During
ground-disturbing construction activities,
if archaeological resources are
encountered which are, or appear to be,
Native American in origin, these artifacts
(“tribal finds”) shall be presumed to be
significant Tribal Cultural Resources
pursuant to PRC 21074. Certified 2014
EIR Mitigation 7-2 (see above) shall
apply.

In addition to implementation of Certified
EIR Mitigation 7-2, the Native American
Heritage Commission shall be contacted
to identify the appropriate tribal
contact(s). The identified contact(s) shal
be informed of the find, and the City will
invite the representative(s) for
consultation while seeking to avoid
damaging effects on the resource, and
to define a data recovery plan (if
required). The City shall also retain a
qualified archaeologist for joint
consultation with the tribal
representative(s). The City, pursuant to
PRC 21074, in consultation with the
appropriate tribe(s) and a qualified
archaeologist, shall consider the
significance under CEQA of the tribal
find, and determine the next appropriate
actions based on the consultation.

Implementation of this measure would
reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level.

City; Individual
project applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
grading permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading
Agenda Packet Page 122 of 263

Page 16 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 8-1: Potential Ground
Instability Impacts. The potential for
ground instability can depend on specific,
highly localized underlying soil conditions.

Determination of liquefaction, differential
settlement, lateral spreading, and
subsidence potential in the Specific Plan
area would require site-specific
geotechnical studies for future individual
development proposals. Possible ground
instability conditions, if not properly
engineered for, could result in associated
significant damage to project buildings
and other improvements, representing a
potentially significant impact.

Mitigation 8-1. Subject to City review
and approval, complete and implement
the geotechnical mitigation
recommendations identified in the
required site-specific geotechnical
investigations and engineering studies,
in coordination with City grading permit
and building permit performance
standards. Project incorporation of this
mitigation requirement would reduce
this impact to a less-than-significant
level.

Individual project
applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
grading permit
issuance;
Condition of
building permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading and
construction
Impact 8-2: Paleontological
Resources Impacts (formerly Impact
7-3: Potential for Disturbance of
Paleontological Resources). The
certified 2014 EIR determined that this
impact would be potentially significant
because the San Pablo Avenue Specific
Plan would allow development in areas
that may include unrecorded
paleontological resources. The 2014
EIR found that the alluvium that
underlies the plan area has a high
potential for containing fossil resources,
and it is possible that significant
paleontological resources could be
discovered during ground-disturbing
activities.

The Plan Update Area would include
these soils with the potential for
unrecorded paleontological resources,
as the geological conditions have not
changed since the 2014 EIR was
certified. This possibility represents a
potentially significant impact.

Mitigation 8-2 (formerly Mitigation 7-
3). During the City’s standard projectspecific environmental checklist review process for all future, discretionary,
public improvement and private
development projects in the Specific
Plan area, the City shall determine the
possible presence of, and the potential
impacts of the action on, paleontological
resources. For projects involving
substantial ground disturbance (more
than 10,000 square feet), the City shall
require individual project applicants to
carry out the following measures:
(1) Education Program. Project
applicants shall implement a program
that includes the following elements:
 Resource identification training
procedures for construction
personnel;
 Spot-checks by a qualified
paleontological monitor of all
excavations deeper than seven feet
below ground surface; and
 Procedures for reporting discoveries
and their geologic context.

City; Individual
project applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
grading permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading
Agenda Packet Page 123 of 263

Page 17 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
(2) Procedures for Resources
Encountered. If subsurface
paleontological resources are
encountered, excavation shall halt in the
vicinity of the resources, and the project
paleontologist shall evaluate the
resource and its stratigraphic context.

The monitor shall be empowered to
temporarily halt or redirect construction
activities to ensure avoidance of
adverse impacts to paleontological
resources. During monitoring, if
potentially significant paleontological
resources are found, “standard”
samples shall be collected and
processed by a qualified paleontologist
to recover micro vertebrate fossils. If
significant fossils are found and
collected, they shall be prepared to a
reasonable point of identification.

Excess sediment or matrix shall be
removed from the specimens to reduce
the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized
catalogs of material collected and
identified shall be provided to a local
museum repository with the specimens.

Significant fossils collected during this
work, along with the itemized inventory
of these specimens, shall be deposited
in a local museum repository for
permanent curatorship and storage. A
report documenting the results of the
monitoring and salvage activities, and
the significance of the fossils, if any,
shall be prepared. The report and
inventory, when submitted to the City,
shall signify the completion of the
program to mitigate impacts on
paleontological resources.

Implementation of this measure would
reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level.

Agenda Packet Page 124 of 263

Page 18 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
NOISE
Impact 13-1: Noise and Land Use
Compatibility. Residential land uses
facilitated by the Specific Plan would be
exposed to exterior noise levels
exceeding 60 dBA Ldn from traffic noise
and 70 dBA Ldn from BART noise.

Future noise levels would exceed both
El Cerrito’s and Richmond’s noise and
land use compatibility standards. This is
a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation 13-1. Future development
would be exposed to outdoor noise
levels exceeding acceptable levels as
defined in the El Cerrito and
Richmond general plans. Noise levels
inside residential structures proposed
in such noise environments would
exceed 45 dBA Ldn, the local
established land use compatibility
threshold. In areas where residential
developments would be exposed to an
Ldn of greater than 60 dBA, El Cerrito
General Plan Policy H3.9 requires the
evaluation of mitigation measures for
specific projects. In Richmond
General Plan Action SN4.A, new
noise-sensitive uses that are located
in an area with day-night average
sound levels (Ldn) of 55 or greater
require a noise study report; the report
shall identify noise mitigation
measures that limit noise to an
acceptable level compared to existing
conditions.
 Utilize site planning to minimize
noise in residential outdoor
activity areas (shared outdoor
space in multi-family
developments) by locating the
areas behind noise barriers, the
buildings, in courtyards, or
orienting the terraces to alleyways
rather than streets, whenever
possible. The goal is a maximum
noise level of 60 dBA Ldn from
roadway traffic and 70 dBA Ldn
from BART noise.
 The City of El Cerrito requires
project-specific acoustical
analyses to achieve interior noise
levels of 45 dBA Ldn or lower, and
Individual project
applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
building permit
issuance;
Condition of
occupancy permit
issuance
Agenda Packet Page 125 of 263

Page 19 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
the adopted instantaneous noise
levels in residential units exposed
to exterior noise levels greater
than 60 dBA Ldn should not exceed 50 dBA Lmax in bedrooms and 55 dBA Lmax in other rooms.

Building sound insulation
requirements would need to
include the provision of forced-air
mechanical ventilation in noise
environments exceeding 60 dBA Ldn so that windows could be kept closed at the occupant’s
discretion to control noise.

Special building construction
techniques (e.g., sound rated
windows and building facade
treatments) may be required
where exterior noise levels
exceed 65 dBA Ldn. These
treatments include, but are not
limited to, sound rated windows
and doors, sound rated exterior
wall assemblies, acoustical
caulking, etc. The specific
determination of what treatments
are necessary will be conducted
on a unit-by-unit basis during
project design. Results of the
analysis, including the description
of the necessary noise control
treatments, will be submitted to
the City, along with the building
plans, which shall be revised as
necessary or approved prior to
issuance of a building permit.

Feasible construction techniques
such as these would adequately
reduce interior noise levels to 45
dBA Ldn or lower and meet
instantaneous noise limits.
 Similar to above, noise insulation
features shall be considered on a
Agenda Packet Page 126 of 263

Page 20 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
case-by-case basis for noisesensitive offices and commercial uses proposed where noise levels
exceed 65 dBA Ldn, in order to
meet adopted noise standards.

Implementation of these measures
would reduce potential noise and land
use compatibility impacts to a lessthan-significant level.

Impact 13-2: Commercial
Development Noise. The San Pablo
Avenue Specific Plan would introduce
commercial uses adjacent to residential
land uses. Specific tenants for the
commercial uses have not been
identified, but uses would probably
include retail stores, grocery stores,
restaurants, or cafes. New commercial
development proposed along with or
next to residential development could
result in noise levels exceeding City
standards. Typical noise levels
generated by loading and unloading
would be similar to noise levels
generated by truck movements on local
roadways. Mechanical equipment
would also have the potential to
generate noise and would be a potential
noise impact. This is a potentially
significant impact.

Mitigation 13-2. New commercial
development proposed in the same
building as or adjacent to residential
development could result in noise
levels exceeding City standards.
 Noise levels at residential property
lines from commercial
development shall be maintained
not in excess of the general plan
and municipal code limits for the
Cities of El Cerrito and Richmond.

The approval of the commercial
development shall require a noise
study demonstrating how the
business – including loading
docks, refuse areas, and
ventilation systems – would meet
these requirements and would be
consistent with the respective
City’s noise standards.
 Ensure that noise-generating
activities, such as maintenance
activities and loading and
unloading activities, are limited to
the hours of 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM.

Implementation of these measures
would reduce the potential commercial
development noise impacts to a lessthan-significant level.

Individual project
applicants
City During individual
project review;
Condition of
building permit
issuance;
Condition of
occupancy permit
issuance
Agenda Packet Page 127 of 263

Page 21 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Impact 13-3: Construction Noise.

Businesses and residences would be
intermittently exposed to high levels of
noise throughout the 2040 plan horizon.

Construction would elevate noise levels
at adjacent businesses and residences
by 15 to 20 dBA or more. This is a
significant impact.

Mitigation 13-3. Construction
equipment shall be well-maintained
and used judiciously to be as quiet as
practical. The following measures,
when applicable, are recommended to
reduce noise from construction
activities:
 Equip all internal combustion
engine-driven equipment with
mufflers that are in good condition
and appropriate for the
equipment.
 Utilize “quiet” models of air
compressors and other stationary
noise sources where technology
exists.
 Locate stationary noisegenerating equipment as far as feasible from sensitive receptors
when sensitive receptors adjoin or
are near a construction area.
 Prohibit unnecessary idling of
internal combustion engines.
 Pre-drill foundation pile holes to
minimize the number of impacts
required to seat the pile.
 Construct solid plywood fences
around construction sites
adjacent to operational business,
residences, or noise-sensitive
land uses.
 A temporary noise control blanket
barrier could be erected, if
necessary, along building facades
facing construction sites. This
mitigation would only be
necessary if conflicts occurred
Individual project
applicants
City Condition of
grading permit
issuance;
Condition of
building permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading and
construction
Agenda Packet Page 128 of 263

Page 22 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
which were irresolvable by proper
scheduling. Noise control blanket
barriers can be rented and quickly
erected.
 Route construction-related traffic
along major roadways and as far
as feasible from sensitive
receptors.
 Ensure that construction activities
(including the loading and
unloading of materials and truck
movements) are limited to the
hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on
weekdays and between the hours
of 9:00 AM and 8:00 PM on
weekends and holidays.
 Ensure that excavating, grading,
and filling activities (including
warming of equipment motors)
are limited to between the hours
of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on
weekdays and between the hours
of 9:00 AM and 8:00 PM on
weekends and holidays.
 Businesses, residences, or noisesensitive land uses adjacent to construction sites shall be notified
of the construction schedule in
writing. Designate a “construction
liaison” who would be responsible
for responding to any local
complaints about construction
noise. The liaison would
determine the cause of the noise
complaints (e.g., starting too
early, bad muffler, etc.) and
institute reasonable measures to
correct the problem.

Conspicuously post a telephone
number for the liaison at the
Agenda Packet Page 129 of 263

Page 23 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
construction site.

Although the above measures would
reduce noise generated by
construction, the impact would remain
significant and unavoidable as a
result of the extended period of time
that adjacent receivers could be
exposed to construction noise.

Impact 13-4: Construction-Related
Vibration. Residences, businesses,
and historic structures could be exposed
to construction-related vibration during
the excavation and foundation work of
buildings. This is a significant impact.

Mitigation 13-4. The following
measures are recommended to
reduce vibration from construction
activities:
 Avoid impact pile driving where
possible. Drilled piles causes
lower vibration levels where
geological conditions permit their
use.
 Avoid using vibratory rollers and
tampers near sensitive areas.
 In areas where project
construction is anticipated to
include vibration-generating
activities, such as pile driving, in
close proximity to existing
structures, site-specific vibration
studies shall be conducted to
determine the area of impact and
to present appropriate mitigation
measures that may include the
following:
- Identify sites that would include
vibration compaction activities
(such as pile driving) and have
the potential to generate
ground-borne vibration, and
the sensitivity of nearby
structures to ground-borne
vibration. Vibration limits shall
Individual project
applicants
City Condition of
grading permit
issuance;
Condition of
building permit
issuance; Field
verify
implementation
during grading and
construction
Agenda Packet Page 130 of 263

Page 24 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
be applied to all vibrationsensitive structures located within 200 feet of the project.

A qualified structural engineer
should conduct this task.
- Develop a vibration monitoring
and construction contingency
plan to identify structures
where monitoring would be
conducted, set up a vibration
monitoring schedule, define
structure-specific vibration
limits, and address the need to
conduct photo, elevation, and
crack surveys to document
before and after construction
conditions.
- Design construction
contingencies that would be
implemented when vibration
levels approached the limits.
- At a minimum, conduct
vibration monitoring during
initial demolition activities and
during pile driving activities.

Monitoring results may indicate
the need for more or less
intensive measurements.
- When vibration levels
approach limits, suspend
construction and implement
contingencies to either lower
vibration levels or secure the
affected structures.
- Conduct post-survey on
structures under either of these
circumstances: (a) when
construction monitoring has
indicated high vibration levels
Agenda Packet Page 131 of 263

Page 25 ends

IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE
(Performance Criteria)

MONITORING VERIFICATION
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring and
Verification Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
or (b) when complaints of
damage have been made due
to construction activities. Make
appropriate repairs or
compensation when damage
has resulted from construction
activities.

It may not be possible to avoid using
pile drivers, vibratory rollers, and
tampers entirely during construction
facilitated by the San Pablo Avenue
Specific Plan. Due to the density of
development in the area, some of
these activities may take place near
sensitive areas. In these cases, the
mitigation measures listed above may
not be sufficient to reduce groundborne vibrations below a level of significance. Therefore, this impact
would be significant and
unavoidable.

Agenda Packet Page 132 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 4
RESOLUTION 2022-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING OF A

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR

PROPERTY LOCATED IN SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Resolution 2014-50, certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Resolution 2014-51, adopting a General Plan Amendment for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Resolution 2014-52, adopting the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Ordinance 2014-06, rezoning properties within the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan area; and
WHEREAS, the draft Specific Plan update was released for public review on July 19, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2022, the City released for a 45-day public review period a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) which identified and evaluated the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the City completed the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and a final draft of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update and released both documents for public review on October 15, 2022; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Specific Plan update has complied with the provisions of Government Code Section 65453; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 19, 2022 at which it received testimony and other evidence and recommended that the City Council certify the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and adopt the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update with amendments regarding building electrification and electric vehicle charging.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the El Cerrito City Council, based on its review and consideration of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update, attached exhibits, and associated Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and all public testimony, adopts the General Plan amendment for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update as detailed in Exhibit A and finds as follows:

1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest.

The SPASP update is in the public interest because it adopts context-sensitive regulations to be applied throughout the Plan area
Agenda Packet Page 133 of 263

2. The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected.

The SPASP update is consistent in all significant respects with the General Plan; in that supports the spirit and intent of all of the existing goals and policies in the General Plan related to the San Pablo Avenue corridor.

3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.

The SPASP update shall be implemented in compliance with all appropriate sections of the El Cerrito Municipal Code, including the Building and Fire Codes as well as in concert with its Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, ensuring that it will not be detrimental to the public’s health, safety or welfare.

4. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was prepared for the San Pablo Specific Plan update in full compliance with applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the SEIR on October 19, 2022, and the City Council certified the SEIR, adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on November 15, 2022 the City Council of the City of El Cerrito passed this Resolution by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

IN WITNESS of this action, I sign this document and affix the corporate seal of the City of El Cerrito on November , 2022.
________________________
Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk
APPROVED:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 134 of 263
11/8/22, 9:24 AM .
https://apps.spatialstream.com/landvision/production/CurrentBuild/Html/printpreview.html 1/1 Exhibit A
San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update General Plan Amendment © 2022 Digital Map Products. All rights reserved.

General Plan
297 feet
Agenda Item No 7.A.

Attachment 5
Agenda Packet Page 135 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 6
RESOLUTION 2022-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE

UPDATED SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN WITH AMENDMENTS

REGARDING BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Resolution 2014-50, certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Resolution 2014-51, adopting a General Plan Amendment for the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Resolution 2014-52, adopting the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014, the El Cerrito City Council adopted Ordinance 2014-06, rezoning properties within the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan area; and
WHEREAS, the draft Specific Plan update was released for public review on July 19, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2022, the City released for a 45-day public review period a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) which identified and evaluated the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the City completed the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and a final draft of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update and released both documents for public review on October 15, 2022; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Specific Plan update has complied with the provisions of Government Code Section 65453; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 19, 2022 at which it received testimony and other evidence and recommended that the City Council certify the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and adopt the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update with amendments regarding building electrification and electric vehicle charging; and
WHEREAS, building electrification reduces carbon emissions and staff will provide additional information supporting the building electrification amendments referenced herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the El Cerrito City Council, based on its review and consideration of the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update, Agenda Packet Page 136 of 263
attached exhibits, associated Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and all other information and testimony, hereby adopts the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update, with amendments as set forth in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, and finds as follows:

1. The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update is in the public interest and will advance the health, safety, and general welfare of the City of El Cerrito.

2. The San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan update is consistent with the El Cerrito General Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on November 15, 2022 the City Council of the City of El Cerrito passed this Resolution by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Attachment 7

2.05.05.01.04 All-Electric Residential Units
A. Applicability

1. The requirements of this Section shall apply to all new residential dwelling units located in projects that include 5 residential dwelling units or more and are subject to Tier II or Tier IV Design Review.

2. This Section shall not apply to non-residential land uses and non-residential components of a mixed use project.

3. The requirements of this Section shall not apply to the use of portable propane appliances for outdoor cooking or heating.

4. This Section shall in no way be construed as amending California Energy Code requirements under California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, nor as requiring the use or installation of any specific appliance or system as a condition of approval.

5. The requirements of this Section shall be incorporated into conditions of approval for Tier II and Tier IV Design Review for projects subject to this Section.

B. Definitions
For the purposes of this Section:

1. “Fuel gas” shall be defined as natural, manufactured, liquefied petroleum, or a mixture of these, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

2. “Fuel gas infrastructure” shall be defined as fuel gas piping, other than service pipe, in or in connection with a building, structure or within the property lines of premises, extending from the point of delivery at the gas meter, service meter assembly, outlet of the service regulator, service shutoff valve, or final pressure regulator, whichever is applicable, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.

C. Prohibited Fuel Gas Infrastructure in Newly Constructed Residential Dwelling Units

1. Fuel gas infrastructure shall be prohibited from serving new residential dwelling units that are subject to this Section. For the purposes of this Section, “serving new residential dwelling units” means, providing fuel gas infrastructure directly to a residential dwwlling unit or otherwise conditioning the residential dwelling unit through the use of fuel gas infrastructure.

2. Existing fuel gas infrastructure shall not be extended to any system or device within a new residential dwelling unit that is subject to this Section. Inactive fuel gas infrastructure shall not be activated or otherwise operated to serve new residential dwelling units.

3. The requirements of this Section shall be deemed objective planning standards under Government Code Section 65913.4 and objective development standards under Government Code Section 65589.5.

D. Exceptions
The following exceptions may apply to a project otherwise subject to this Section:

Agenda Packet Page 138 of 263

1. Significant Hardship or Technical Infeasibility.If an applicant for new residential dwelling units subject to this Section believes that the type of project or physical site conditions, necessary operational requirements, or the public health, safety, or economic welfare in the event of an electric grid outage make it a hardship or infeasible to meet the requirements of this Chapter, or the project meets any City-adopted sustainability and environmental policies, then the applicant may request an exemption or modification from the Zoning Administrator. The burden shall be on the applicant to demonstrate the grounds for any exemption.

2. Financial Infeasibility. If an applicant for new residential dwelling units subject to this Section believes that the prohibition on fuel gas infrastructure in newly constructed residential dwelling units will render the project as a whole financially infeasible, then the applicant may request an exemption or modification from the Zoning Administrator.

The burden shall be on the applicant to demonstrate the grounds for any exemption.

E. Process for consideration of exemption applications.

1. To assist the Zoning Administrator in evaluating an exemption request, the City may retain one or more consultants to peer review information submitted by the applicant.

The applicant shall reimburse the City for the costs of the consultants retained, plus the City’s standard charge for administrative overhead as set forth in the City’s Master Fee Schedule.

2. In making a determination in response to an exemption application under this Section , the Zoning Administrator shall determine that the facts offered in support of an application demonstrate both that substantial evidence in the record supports the exemption request, and that the purposes of this Section will have been achieved to the maximum extent reasonably allowed by the circumstances. Any exemption granted shall require the applicant to comply with the requirements of this Section to the fullest extent reasonably achievable given the circumstances, provided such requirements meet or exceed the electrical readiness requirements in the El Cerrito Municipal Code.

3. The Zoning Administrator’s decision shall contain a statement of the facts upon which the decision was based, as well as the reduced compliance level requirements that must be achieved. The Zoning Administrator’s decision shall become a condition of the development or building permit issued for the project.

4. The Zoning Administrator’s decision shall be mailed or electronically mailed to the applicant to the address shown on the application.

NOTE: The City of Berkeley adopted a similar prohibition on fuel gas infrastructure in new buildings that is currently being challenged in federal court. The trial court upheld Berkeley’s ordinance in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley (N.D. Cal. 2021) 547 F.Supp.3d 878. That decision is on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard oral arguments in the summer of 2022. The City will review this Section in light of any Ninth Circuit decision and may suspend enforcement of this Section, issue administrative regulations for the administration of this Section, or other appropriate actions that might alter or limit the application of this Section.

Agenda Packet Page 139 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 8
O. Electric Vehicle Charging
All parking spaces shall be equipped with a raceway that originates at the main electric service or subpanel.

When parking is provided for a project containing 5 or more residential dwelling units and/or 6,000 square feet or more of commercial space, a minimum of 20 percent of the parking spaces, but not less than one parking space, shall be installed with Level 2 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). For the purposes of this Section, “EVSE” shall be as defined by the California Green Building Standards Code. An automatic load management system (ALMS) shall be permitted to reduce load when multiple vehicles are charging. For the purposes of this Section, “ALMS” shall be as defined by the California Green Building Standards Code.

1. Exceptions
a. Significant Hardship or Technical Infeasibility. If an applicant for a project subject to this Section believes that the type of project or physical site conditions, necessary operational requirements, or the public health, safety, or economic welfare make it a hardship or infeasible to meet the requirements of this Chapter, or the project meets any City-adopted sustainability and environmental policies, then the applicant may request an exemption or modification from the Zoning Administrator.

The burden shall be on the applicant to demonstrate the grounds for any exemption.
b. Financial Infeasibility. If an applicant for a new project subject to this Section believes that the amount of EVSE required by this Section will render the project as a whole financially infeasible, then the applicant may request an exemption or modification from the Zoning Administrator. The burden shall be on the applicant to demonstrate the grounds for any exemption.

2. Process for consideration of exemption applications. a. To assist the Zoning Administrator in evaluating an exemption request, the City may retain one or more consultants to peer review information submitted by the applicant. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the costs of the consultants retained, plus the City’s standard charge for administrative overhead as set forth in the City’s Master Fee Schedule.
b. In making a determination in response to an exemption application under this Section , the Zoning Administrator shall determine that the facts offered in support of an application demonstrate both that substantial evidence in the record supports the exemption request, and that the purposes of this Section will have been achieved to the maximum extent reasonably allowed by the circumstances. Any exemption granted shall require the applicant to comply with the requirements of this Section to the fullest extent reasonably achievable given the circumstances, provided such requirements meet or exceed the EVSE requirements in the El Cerrito Municipal Code.

Agenda Packet Page 140 of 263
c. The Zoning Administrator’s decision shall contain a statement of the facts upon which the decision was based, as well as the reduced compliance level requirements that must be achieved. The Zoning Administrator’s decision shall become a condition of the development or building permit issued for the project. d. The Zoning Administrator’s decision shall be mailed or electronically mailed to the applicant to the address shown on the application.

Agenda Packet Page 141 of 263
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 9
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO REZONING PROPERTIES

LOCATED IN THE SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: Rezone The zoning map of the City of El Cerrito is hereby amended such that certain real property currently zoned/described as: the 2.28- acre area bounded by Central Avenue, Richmond Street, the Ohlone Greenway, and Willow Street; and more particularly described in Exhibit A, are rezoned to San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan.

Section 2: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The city council hereby declares that it would have passed the ordinance codified in this chapter, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this chapter would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 3: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty days after the date of its adoption. Prior to the expiration of fifteen days from the passage thereof, the ordinance or a summary thereof shall be posted or published as may be required by law, and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on November 15, 2022 and passed by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
ADOPTED AND ORDERED published at a regular meeting of the City Council held on (Month, DD, YYYY) and passed by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
APPROVED:
_____________________ _
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 142 of 263
ATTEST:
_______________________
Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk

ORDINANCE CERTIFICATION
I, Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk of the City of El Cerrito, do hereby certify that this Ordinance is the true and correct original Ordinance No. (2022-XX) of the City of El Cerrito; that said Ordinance was duly enacted and adopted by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito at a meeting of the City Council held on the (DD day of Month, 2022); and that said Ordinance has been published and/or posted in the manner required by law.

WITNESS my hand and the Official Seal of the City of El Cerrito, California, this day of (Month), 2022.
_____________________________
Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk
Exhibit A: Amended Zoning Map
Agenda Packet Page 143 of 263
11/8/22, 9:09 AM .
https://apps.spatialstream.com/landvision/production/CurrentBuild/Html/printpreview.html 1/1 Exhibit A
San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update Rezone
© 2022 Digital Map Products. All rights reserved.

SPASP UPDATE
Proposed Zoning
297 feet
Agenda Item No. 7.A.

Attachment 10
Agenda Packet Page 144 of 263

AGENDA BILL
Agenda Item No. 8.A.

Date: November 15, 2022
To: El Cerrito City Council
From: Yvetteh Ortiz, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Public Works Department; Christopher Jones, Recreation Director, Recreation Department
Subject: Budget Amendment for Community Recreation Swimming Pool RePlastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5

ACTION PROPOSED
Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Adopted Budget and Capital Improvement Program to appropriate $59,850 from the General Fund balance for construction of the Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5.

BACKGROUND
The Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No.

C5030.5 (Project) will implement mandated health and safety repairs and upgrades in and around the Recreation Pool at the El Cerrito Swim Center. The original scope of work generally consisted of replastering and retiling of the pool, replacement of main drain sumps and grates, replacement of the ADA lift and footing, replacement of the existing slide tower, and refinishing of the existing slide flume and mushroom water feature.

The original bid from Tricon Construction, Inc., DBA Tricon Aquatics (Tricon), the sole responsible and responsive bidder, for construction of the Project significantly exceeded the Engineer’s Estimate and Project budget of $335,000. The Engineer’s Estimate also exceeded the current budget for the Project because the scope of the work had to be expanded to capture all mandated health and safety work associated with the Recreation Pool area. City staff’s analysis of current bidding trends among neighboring agencies revealed higher than normal bid pricing due in part to a lack of available bidders, subcontractors, and materials. Additionally, the limited number of contractors available to perform the specialty items in the Project scope, specifically the replastering, led to increased bid prices.

Because of the mandated health and safety repairs, several of the project elements must be completed as soon as possible. City staff has been targeting the work to be completed over the winter closure of the Recreation Pool to minimize disruptions to programming and revenue (which is approximately $65,000 during the spring months, beginning in March, and around an additional $230,000 during the summer months, beginning in June). Because of the uncertainty in the bidding climate and limited time window for construction to minimize disruptions, City staff requested that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate with Tricon and execute the contract Agenda Packet Page 145 of 263
Agenda Item No. 8.A.
within the current budget for the Project.

On October 18, 2022, the City Council approved plans and specifications for the Project, rejected the bid submitted by USA Construction as non-responsive, accepted the bid submitted by Tricon, and authorized the City Manager to execute a contract within the current budget for the Project, contingent on successful negotiations with Tricon for construction of the Project (Resolution 2022-79).

ANALYSIS
City staff and consultants met with Tricon on October 20, 2022 to discuss potential project changes to bring the Project within the current budget. One of the cost-saving measures included redesigning the main drain grates to allow reuse instead of reconstruction of the existing sumps. In early November, the City’s consultants met with Contra Costa County Health, which permits work on commercial pools, to seek approval of the redesign of the main drain grates and were pleased to report that the County agreed. Subsequently, City staff and consultants successfully negotiated with Tricon to reduce costs to a total of $328,500 by incorporating the main drain revisions and removing the slide replacement and refinishing of play features from the scope of work.

This reduced the cost to within the current budget of $335,000. Given the prior City Council authorization, the City Manager intends to execute the contract with Tricon as soon as possible and in conjunction with the County issuance of a permit for the revised work. Other cost-saving options explored but not incorporated include leaving some of the original pool tiles in place (the contractor indicated this would increase costs) and having the City separately procure and install the ADA lift (City staff determined this would be inefficient and would not justify the small savings).

The estimated costs for construction for the revised project scope is summarized below.

Tricon Contract $328,500
Contract Contingency (10%) $32,850
Construction Management $32,000
Miscellaneous $1,500
Total $394,850
As indicated in the October 18, 2022 Agenda Bill, upon successful negotiations, City staff anticipated returning to the City Council should additional funds be needed to cover costs for construction such as contract contingency and construction management activities, including design support, administration, engineering, and testing. At this time, City staff requests an appropriation in the amount of $59,850 from the General Fund Balance for this purpose. As budgeted, Measure H does not have sufficient fund balance to cover this request.

City staff is evaluating options for replacement of the water slide and refinishing of play Agenda Packet Page 146 of 263
Agenda Item No. 8.A.
features and will return to the City Council at a later date to request additional funding appropriation to complete these elements.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONSIDERATIONS
The proposed action would fulfill the City's Strategic Plan Goal D – Develop and rehabilitate public facilities as community focal points by addressing ongoing and deferred maintenance of facilities and infrastructure; and Goal E – Ensure the public’s health and safety by providing safe and accessible recreation facilities.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The Project is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because the Project is a repair to an existing facility involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that presently existing. More specifically, restoration or rehabilitation of deteriorated or damaged facilities to meet current standards of public health and safety, unless it is determined that the damage was substantial and resulted from an environmental hazard such as an earthquake, landslide, or flood, is exempt from CEQA.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Current funding for construction of the Project is included in the FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget and Capital Improvement Program in the amount of $335,000, including $270,350 from the Measure A Swim Center Fund and $64,650 from the Measure H Parks & Recreation Facilities Fund. City staff is requesting $59,850 from the General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance to complete the work as described above.

At the end of FY 2021-22, the General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance was $7.2 million, and the unaudited projected FY 2021-22 General Fund balance is $8 million (including American Rescue Plan Act funds), for an estimated total of $15.2 million General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance. The American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds are eligible for infrastructure maintenance and repair projects of this type. Additionally, in FY 2021-22, the Swim Center outperformed its operating budget in the General Fund by at least $200,000 (unaudited), meaning that allocating funds for this project from the General Fund balance would reinvest revenue generated by the Swim Center back into its capital needs.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed action and found that legal considerations have been addressed.

Reviewed by:

Agenda Packet Page 147 of 263
Agenda Item No. 8.A.

Karen Pinkos, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Resolution
Agenda Packet Page 148 of 263
RESOLUTION 2022-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CERRITO AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2022-23 ADOPTED BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TO APPROPRIATE $59,850 FROM THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMUNITY RECREATION SWIMMING POOL REPLASTERING PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. C5030.5 WHEREAS, the Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5 (Project) will implement mandated, health and safety repairs and upgrades in and around the Recreation Pool at the El Cerrito Swim Center; and WHEREAS, funding for construction of the Project is included in the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget and Capital Improvement Program in the amount of $335,000 including $270,350 from the Measure A Swim Center Fund and $64,650 from the Measure H Parks & Recreation Facilities Fund; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 2022-79 approving plans and specifications for the Project, rejecting the bid submitted by USA Construction. for the Project as non-responsive, accepting the bid submitted by Tricon Construction, Inc., DBA Tricon Aquatics (Tricon); and authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract within the current project budget, contingent on successful negotiations with Tricon for construction of the Project; and
WHEREAS, City staff and consultants, successfully negotiated with Tricon for a reduced cost of $328,500 to be within the project budget and the City Manager intends to execute the contract with Tricon as soon as possible; and WHEREAS, additional funds are needed to cover costs for the contract contingency, construction management and miscellaneous activities; and WHEREAS, a budget amendment is requested for this purpose; and WHEREAS, the Project is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because the project involves a repair to an existing facility involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that presently existing.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of El Cerrito that it hereby amends the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget and Capital Improvement Program to appropriate $59,850 from the General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance for construction of the Community Recreation Swimming Pool Re-Plastering Project, City Project No. C5030.5; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage and adoption.

Agenda Packet Page 149 of 263
I CERTIFY that at a regular meeting on November 15, 2022 the City Council of the City of El Cerrito passed this Resolution by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

IN WITNESS of this action, I sign this document and affix the corporate seal of the City of El Cerrito on November , 2022.
________________________
Holly M. Charléty, City Clerk
APPROVED:
________________________
Gabe Quinto, Mayor
Agenda Packet Page 150 of 263
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 94530
Telephone (510) 215-4305 Fax (510) 215-4379 http://www.el-cerrito.org

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIALS

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
November 15, 2022
(Revised November 16, 2022)

PUBLIC COMMENT INDEX

1. Public Comments received
Agenda Item 6B – El Cerrito Police Department 2021 in Review

1. Presentation
Agenda Item 7A – San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update

1. An Errata document correcting errors in the SPASP update.

2. Resolution PC22-14 of the Planning Commission recommending certification of the SEIR

3. Resolution PC22-15 of the Planning Commission recommending adoption of the SPASP update with amendments

4. Revised City Council Resolution adopting the SPASP update with additional findings related to a natural gas prohibition for new multi-family residential units

5. Presentation
Agenda Packet Page 151 of 263
CITY HALL 10890 San Pablo Avenue, El Cerrito, CA 94530
Telephone (510) 215-4305 Fax (510) 215-4379 http://www.el-cerrito.org

SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MATERIALS

PUBLIC COMMENT INDEX

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
November 15, 2022
(Revised November 16, 2022)
The following Public Comments were received by 4:00:00 p.m. 11/15/2022, were provided directly to City Councilmembers in advance of the meeting, and were posted online as supplemental materials at www.el-cerrito.org/CouncilMeetingMaterials Public Comments – Items Not on the Agenda

1. Cordell Hindler

2. Lisa Tsering

3. Michael Fischer

4. Robin Mitchell
Agenda Item 7A – San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update

1. Fred Bialy

2. Howdy Goudey

3. Denice A. Dennis, MPH

4. Allison Cooper

5. Daniellle Watters Westbrook

6. Robert M. Gould, MD

7. Nerisa de Jesus
Agenda Packet Page 152 of 263
From: Cordell Hindler
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments- Not on Agenda
Date: Thursday, November 10, 2022 3:48:35 PM
Good Evening Mayor Quinto, Council and Staff,
I have some items for the Record

1. for the Next Agenda, the Council should Invite Danny wan to Provide a Presentation on how the Port of Oakland is slowly recovering from the Pandemic.

2. Also to Invite Sabrina Landreth to provide an Update on the plans that east bay regional park has for prepandemic Sincerely
Cordell
Agenda Packet Page 153 of 263
From: Lisa Tsering
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments – Not on Agenda (License plate readers) Date: Friday, November 11, 2022 8:22:36 AM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

License plate readers
I have lived in El Cerrito for over 10 years and have watched as our crime rates have increased, and as crime has touched my family.

I strongly support the adoption of license plate readers for increased safety.

Thank you,
Lisa Tsering
Lisa Tsering
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Agenda Packet Page 154 of 263
From: Michael Fischer
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments - Not on Agenda
Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 3:39:30 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization. [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments –
[email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments –
l to [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line
Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments – Agenda Item #
Mayor Quinto and Council Members —
My name is Michael Fischer and I have the honor and privilege of being your designated Library Commissioner on the Contra Costa County Library Commission. I also serve as chair of that Commission.

I plan to bring you, on a monthly or bi-monthly basis, a brief update with highlights about our little library, especially as we begin to explore the possibility of a new, 21st century library at the BART Transit Oriented Development being proposed for the El Cerrito Plaza BART area.

Despite its small size, the El Cerrito branch is the busiest library among the system’s west county libraries. We are at least 40% busier than any other library. We are popular. We are now fully staffed which helps in serving our growing patron group.

The library is continuing to open up after the restrictions imposed by the Coronavirus pandemic. One of the most wonderful programs, Read to a Dog, has now returned. This program uses therapy dogs to “listen” to children as they read aloud. The dogs are clearly enthralled and non-judgmental because someone is talking to them — and this greatly helps children build confidence in their reading skills. In addition story time is also available to attract children to books and stories.

The active Teen Advisory Group (TAG) continues to help bring programs that attract teens to our library. This month, at their request, there have been programs on financial literacy for teens.

Agenda Packet Page 155 of 263
And there is more to come. The new year will see English Language Learners Groups, the Mystery Book Club, Elder Tech, the Knit and Crochet Group, and an Insider’s Group for the differently abled. More on some of these in my next report.

I’d like to thank the council for continuing to fund expanded hours for our library. As you can see, this is money well spent and benefits all segments of our diverse community.

Thank you.

Kind regards,
Michael
Michael Fischer (he him)
[email protected]
El Cerrito City Designated Library Commissioner
Chair, Contra Costa County Library Commission
El Cerrito Needs an Appropriate 21st Century Library
Agenda Packet Page 156 of 263
From: Robin Mitchell
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments – Not on Agenda
Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 2:56:51 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Public Comment for items not on the agenda
City Council meeting 11/15/2022
Mayor Quinto and Council Members Fadelli, Motoyama, Rudnick, Abelson:

I am concerned that the city had taken the stand that when the city committees and commissions return to in person meetings there will not be a hybrid meeting option.

I think that not providing a hybrid meeting option is actually an accessibility issue and restricts members of those committees only to people who can actually attend in person, which I believe is discriminatory.

I am the chairperson of the Urban Forest Committee, and have had recent health problems that do not allow me to currently attend meetings in person, and I will potentially have that same issue if the meetings restart in February or even March (it is still unclear to me when this will actually happen). My health status is respiratory related, requires me to be on oxygen, which is inconvenient for attending long meetings, and does not allow me to get the latest Omicron variant booster, so I am hesitant to be in an enclosed environment with people whose vaccination status and recent covid exposure is unknown. So I will not be able to meet in the small conference rooms usually used by the Committees and would probably not be comfortable meeting even in the Council Chambers.

There are other members of various committees and commissions who have different issues around meeting in person, but who can attend remotely. Not having the hybrid meeting option is at best a loss of talent and contribution, and at worst is discriminatory.

I know that the technology for having hybrid meetings seems daunting but I believe a much simpler technology could be set up for having remote attendance for committees and commissions compared to the elaborate technology apparently required for the city council meetings.

If the issue is the requirement of the Brown Act that the remote members be in a place that is available to the public, I would request that the City Attorney look into waivers for that requirement on the grounds that it is discriminatory to the members of those committees and commissions to have that requirement, particularly if there is already a public meeting option available by attending the in-person meetings taking place in City Hall.

Thank you for considering these requests.

Robin Mitchell
El Cerrito Resident
Agenda Packet Page 157 of 263
From: Fred Bialy
To: Gabe Quinto; Paul Fadelli; Janet Abelson; Tessa Rudnick; Lisa Motoyama Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments - Agenda Item #7A
Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 11:08:36 AM
Dear Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, and City Council Members Fadelli, Abelson and Rudnick, I’m writing to urge you to support the Planning Commission's recommended amendments to the San Pablo Area Specific Plan Update that incorporates requirements for all-electric new construction and more robust EV charging infrastructure.

In El Cerrito’s Climate Emergency Resolution of August, 2019, the city committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as quickly as possible. All-electric new construction is a first step towards reducing the GHG emissions that come from the buildings in our city. Buildings that don’t use natural gas are cheaper to build and healthier and safer for residents and other community members. Furthermore, the BAAQMD report of April 2022 (CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans) concluded that new buildings, both residential and commercial, needed to not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing in order to do their fair share in implementing California’s goal of carbon neutrality by 2045.

El Cerrito's staff position on this BAAQMD resolution is that it need not apply to the SPASP Update and SEIR as the start of their development predates release of the report. While this would technically be correct, resting on technicalities will hinder rather than advance El Cerrito’s commitment to address our Climate Emergency. It is certainly reasonable to not hold projects that have already progressed past a certain stage of planning or entitlement to an all-electric requirement. But going forward, an all-electric requirement for new buildings is one of many steps that the City should take to fulfilling its commitment to addressing the Climate Emergency.

The El Cerrito staff has raised the specter of law suits in response to requiring all-electric new construction.

Berkeley was the first jurisdiction in California to instate a natural gas ban. Since Berkeley’s ordinance was challenged, 61 other jurisdictions in California have passed their own all-electric new construction ordinances, including Richmond, the Board of Supervisors in Contra Costa County, Hercules and Martinez, without any subsequent legal action.

The Planning Commission’s recommendations for more robust EV charging infrastructure in new buildings are important for addressing the GHG emissions from transportation, which contributed 50.9% of El Cerrito’s GHG emissions in 2005. California is committed to a rapid transition from gasoline powered vehicles to zero-emission vehicles, primarily electric vehicles. This transition will be quicker if prospective purchasers of EVs are confident that they will have the ability to charge their vehicles at their homes.

Sincerely,
Fred Bialy
Agenda Packet Page 158 of 263
From: Howdy Goudey
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public comment for 11/15 meeting, agenda item 7A Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 3:23:51 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear Mayor Quinto and Councilmembers,
In addition to my previous letter focused on climate action through building electrification and EV charging infrastructure, please consider the following general comments regarding the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update.

1. Prohibit new fossil gas infrastructure and gas appliances in the new construction, and major retrofit, in the Specific Plan area. There will be decades of ongoing fossil gas GHG emissions associated with any new building built to use gas and the cost to retrofit it to electric in the future will be greater than doing it now when all-electric buildings already cost less than those with gas infrastructure.

2. A lot of different EV charging requirements have been discussed. I support the amendment based on the Planning Commission's recommendation, but there are still missing details about total service/transformer capacity for EV charging, and raceway conduit capacity for each charger ready space. Consider the following guidance to best support more EV charging now and in the future. Reducing parking ratios and focusing on transit and active modes is a fine way to contribute to lowering transport GHG emissions, but the remaining vehicle traffic needs to be well supported for electrification, including in new multifamily buildings, commercial parking, street parking, car share venues, etc. At a minimum, there really should be a universal charging accessibility floor of a dedicated level 1 outlet (1.4kW) for each space for residential, but it would be preferable to have that minimum be a "half" rate (16A) level 2 outlet (3.3 - 3.8kW) provided for each space. The incremental cost of providing wiring and outlets versus empty conduit is very low, so wired outlets ready to go is preferred. That way a <$300 portable EVSE can be supplied by the EV owner. Lower cost EVSEs like this can be used without the burden of subscription plans if the parking spaces are submetered for electricity payment to be reconciled without a service provider. Still, there needs to be a large fraction of higher rate (30- 40A) level 2 charging infrastructure, too, particularly for short term parking and commercial spaces (and this would be subscription service providers with point of sale payment). With fewer off-street parking spaces being provided, solutions to support street-side EV charging become more important, especially for electrifying car share vehicles and the plan should explicitly prepare for this.

3. Reducing embodied carbon emissions associated with building materials needs to be Agenda Packet Page 159 of 263
taken seriously in the Specific Plan. These are large impacts that take many years to recover with lower operational emissions, but there are measures that can be taken to reduce the magnitude of embodied emissions. For instance, reduced carbon concrete is rapidly becoming mainstream and should be required by the plan.

4. Create strong enforceable standards for reducing material waste associated with construction. The off-site modular construction utilized at the Mayfair project generated about 10 acres of single-use plastic sheeting waste to the landfill for the temporary covers used during the delivery of each module. The same modular construction, at a larger scale, is expected to be used for the Plaza BART project (the largest project likely to fall under the revised Specific Plan). This problem has long been identified and it will be exceptionally negligent if there is no effort to remedy the problem when the Plaza project is constructed. The plan should explicitly address this. If nothing different is done, the Plaza BART project will likely generate more than 40 acres of single use plastic waste, more than enough to cover San Pablo Ave. curb to curb for its entire length in El Cerrito.

5. Construction equipment is dirty and noisy and overly reliant on fossil fuel power.

There need to be stronger measures in the Plan to require the use of temporary grid electrical services to eliminate the use of fossil fuel generators and other fossil fuel powered equipment.

6. There needs to be future looking implementation of infrastructure that takes advantage of the lower costs at the time of construction. For instance, plumbing for greywater separation on waste drains and non-potable water supplies for irrigation and toilet flushing, etc.

7. Sustainable design elements need to be more forcefully implemented rather than using language like "consider." The majority of the rest of the plan uses the language of “comply.” The argument that sustainable design is more expensive and is a disincentive to affordable housing does not follow from the observation that the recent affordable projects Ohlone Gardens and Hana Gardens both have installed solar when none of the market rate SPASP projects have installed solar. Market rate can do better if the affordable projects are doing it. Market rate has a short term profit motive rather than long term cost effectiveness. Affordable projects have a long operation horizon as part of their business model and solar and other sustainable design elements serve them well over the lifetime of the project. Why allow short-term thinking to prevail, when we know what is better in the long run?

8. Unit level utility metering and display (of electricity and the unit's portion of shared hot water) should be required as standard in all new dwellings, as it is for domestic water Agenda Packet Page 160 of 263
meters.

9. Given the recurring drought conditions and the issues with stormwater management, we should move beyond flow through c.3 stormwater treatments and establish onsite storage and reuse of stormwater. It is exceptionally wasteful to use potable water for flushing toilets. Rainwater cisterns are a great way to serve non-potable water needs and reduce stress on the imported water supply while also reducing heavy flashes of stormwater runoff during heavy rainfall.

10. The changes to the shadow standards need to be better communicated with drawings depicting the shading impacts of baseline conditions and the changed conditions. The Planning Commission explicitly asked for these changes to be diagrammed in their first meeting on the Specific Plan update, but there was no further information offered on this when the Specific Plan update returned to the Planning Commission for a second meeting. In general, the reliance on a daylight plane standard rather than a shadow standard is desirable because it is easier to implement and confirm the accuracy of compliance, but the proposed change to replace the backyard shadow line standard with a daylight plane standard, will likely impose much deeper shadows on the backyards of residential neighbors to the east of San Pablo. The amount of this change at least needs to be clearly disclosed with accurate diagrams and visualizations before you make a decision about it. This change seems unnecessary and it is likely that a more balanced and easier to implement approach can be devised. In earlier discussions it was mentioned that the combined shadow and daylight plane standards can’t impose more development restriction than previously allowed under the plan; however, it is important to remember that the original plan and the way the plan ended up being implemented are not the same thing. There is no obligation to maintain the level of development enabled by the Zoning Administrator interpretation of the plan, as this was a flawed decision that was never brought to a discretionary body, as required by the plan. As such, any baseline scope of development associated with shadow and daylight plane standards needs to be based on the original plan language before the flawed interpretation. The original language was not really that ambiguous and it had been applied correctly for the Credence project before it was changed by the interpretation to allow the Cerrito Vista project to impose the same shadow violation without using the Tier IV process. I have no issue with removing the neighborhood street shadow standard from perpendicular neighborhood streets immediately adjoining San Pablo, but the sweeping change imposed by the interpretation was not the right way to fix the issue and it was never reviewed and approved by a discretionary body. The Specific Plan update has an opportunity to do a better job with the shadow and daylight plane standards. Just make sure the baseline for comparing any new approaches is the pre-interpretation development constraints.

11. Public open space criteria should explicitly focus on catalyzing new, high quality, Agenda Packet Page 161 of 263
green/open space in the plan area, as opposed to in-lieu fees funding maintenance and improvements in existing green spaces at a greaters distance from the plan area.

Greenspace rather than hardscape should be a significant required component of public open space. Many of the public open spaces provided so far are notable poor quality and not getting any use (for instance the sad little strip along the sidewalk with what is supposed to be a bocce court on the north side of the Cerrito Vista development).

12. There needs to be language in the plan that strengthens the enforcement and followthrough on bringing Zoning Administrator interpretations to a discretionary body (Planning Commission) in a timely fashion. This was handled poorly in the case of the only interpretation that was issued under the old Specific Plan (never brought to a discretionary body and years have elapsed). Something should be changed in the Plan so this abuse of power and lack of follow-through is not repeated. The Zoning Administrator should not be such sweeping control of a significant change to the Plan without further review.

13. Strengthen the language used to foster habitat. “Consider” is not going to provide meaningful progress on implementation of pollinator pathway installation consistent with the Urban Greening Plan. This needs to be a forcefully implemented part of the plan.

14. Introduce a 1% for environment element to the plan, similar to the 1% for art.

15. There is an open space change in the Plan update requiring pocket parks to be a min. dimension of 50' wide by 90' deep, with a min. 50' lot frontage, which seems unnecessarily specific and limiting. There are not many large opportunity sites for parks in the Specific Plan area. We definitely need all the large park space in and near the Plan area that we can get, but that shouldn’t discourage a good number of well designed small pocket park examples, too.

16. The transparency area (window) requirement was removed from facades facing greenways/creeks. There is a lot less high quality greenspace than there is street frontage and it seems even more important to maintain a high transparency requirement toward green spaces rather than closing them off from the built environment.

17. While this plan is an "update" it is important to reflect that there are really only modest changes being proposed. This is essentially a "more of the same" trajectory, which may be fine if you are happy with what happened under the Specific Plan during the Agenda Packet Page 162 of 263
first 8 years, but I hope you will agree that there is plenty to learn from and improve upon. We should really be doing much more than just rubber stamping another very similar plan without addressing some of the shortcomings observed of the past 8 years. The Specific Plan was very successful at getting new development applications and approving them in a timely fashion. However, the production of actual units has been very slow. Of the roughly 17 projects entitled under the Specific plan, only 1 small project and 3 large projects have been built. That is only about 25% of the projects and about 21% of the unit count being realized so far. This completion rate looks unlikely to approach 50% even given several more years. This is not just a pandemic/inflation phenomenon. Many of the projects exceeded their allotted 2 year development periods in a hot market before the pandemic hit. We should not be expected to accept a development cycle with such a low rate of conversion of entitlements to delivered projects and there should not be such a long period between entitlement and completion. Most of the entitled Specific Plan sites have sat vacant for years with very poor maintenance, resulting in years of blight on unused spaces rather than the high quality developments that were promised. What policies are being proposed to address this? I assume you are not satisfied with this outcome? Shouldn't we actually try to do something about it? Below are my suggestions, but I'm sure there are others. I would like to hear this issue discussed and a policy change actually proposed, rather than just ignoring it and accepting more of the same delay and blight. A standard for temporary productive use of vacant sites in the development pipeline is needed. This can support establishment of new businesses with low barrier pop-up activities that can get started under reasonable rents and may allow them to transition to store front businesses. A vacancy tax on unused parcels in the Specific Plan area should be established to incentivize productive use or sales (at lower prices than owners are holding out for). There is no value, only harm, to the community for a speculative land owner to sit on a parcel and do nothing with it, except inviting blight. This is a behavior that should not be rewarded and a vacancy tax would serve to either encourage the owner to put the property to a productive use or sell it at what the market will bear when there is a strong expectation that the property has to be put to productive use, including the requirement of temporary productive uses while development plans are in process. Revenue from the vacancy tax could be put toward supporting creating temporary productive use businesses on development sites and other economic development activity. The Plaza BART project is a huge and important project, but this policy should be about more than carving out a healthy unit count in a program EIR to serve the development of one important project. It needs to thoughtfully consider how to bring about the positive transformation envisioned by the Specific Plan throughout the plan area and the pace and consequences, so far, begs the question, how can we go about this more effectively in the future?
Thank you for your consideration,
Howdy Goudey
El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 163 of 263
From: Howdy Goudey
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment for 11/15, agenda item 7A
Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 12:09:30 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear Mayor Quinto and Councilmembers,
Please adopt the San Pablo Specific Plan Update with the amendments recommended by the EQC and the Planning Commission, ideally with even more climate action.

It is imperative to act on the commitments made in the Council's 2019 Climate Emergency Declaration rather than continue delays and excuses for not taking the meaningful climate actions that at least 64 other CA jurisdictions have already taken (namely decarbonizing buildings with electrification). The draft Specific Plan Update without the electrification amendments is essentially the same as the plan was 8 years ago from a climate perspective, neglecting the Council's self-stated responsibility to take timely climate action and instead waiting for the state to take actions for us that we could take today.

Consider this analogy for global climate action. Each community is a boat, but all the community boats in the world are lashed together in a great raft on the sea. Each community has holes of various sizes in their boats. They are all taking on water and slowly sinking.

These holes represent GHG emissions from burning fossil fuels and other sources that are wrecking the climate, and causing us to “sink” our future. Many communities have stopped making new holes (no new fossil fuel use in buildings) and are actively patching up old holes (retrofitting to serve loads with green electricity instead of fossil fuels). Their boats are more buoyant and help support those taking on more water, but they will still be dragged down by those who aren’t addressing their holes. To be true environmental leaders, we need to take responsibility and stop making new holes in our boat so we aren't continuing to drag down all the boats around us. Without the electrification amendments, this Specific Plan and this SEIR does not represent the environmental leadership we must deliver.

I hope you had a chance to review the public comment and responses in the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report regarding the San Pablo Specific Plan, before you vote on recommending certification of it to Council tonight, as this document was not directly included or linked in your meeting packet (see the Final SEIR document starting on page 9).

Supporting the electrification amendment, and beyond, I have summarized some important points about the Specific Plan Update and SEIR for your consideration.

1. The electrification amendment should be modified to apply the electric only standard to all residential uses (not just 5+ units). Also, there is no reason to exempt commercial buildings from electric (heat pump) water and space heating. It is fine to offer a limited exception for types of cooking in commercial kitchens that can't be accomplished with electricity, but that is a rather limited need and can probably be more economically served with bottled gas rather than installing piped infrastructure for such a small load.

2. It is inappropriate, and inconsistent with our GHG emission targets (net-zero by 2045 or sooner), to continue to allow fossil gas infrastructure installations in new buildings, including the potential of 1236 MTCO2e/yr in 2040 based on the SEIR analysis.

Agenda Packet Page 164 of 263

3. The 1.84 MTCO2e/SP/YR GHG emissions target for 2040 is not adequately substantiated and does not provide a realistic path to meeting climate neutrality by 2045 or sooner, per current State AB 2133 and the 2019 El Cerrito Climate Emergency targets. There is no technical support, nor any references offered that anyone else is using the 1.84 metric. The SEIR claims that the 4.6 MTCO2e/yr metric used to calculate the 1.84 metric is still "current" despite it being out for date and no longer used by BAAQMD. BAAQMD abandoned quantitative metrics in favor of a building electrification and EV charging infrastructure standard.

4. CA emission targets are absolute, not per-capita based, yet the carbon emission metric used in the SEIR is per-capita, which hides growing aggregate emissions when population rises, even when the amount per person goes down. No response was offered regarding the inconsistency with CA goals of using a per-capita reduction target rather than an aggregate emission target.

5. The CalEEMod modeling and analysis that concludes the Specific Plan emissions are below the 1.84 metric are not adequately documented with clearly stated inputs that allow an independent party to verify the claimed performance. The response to this comment states that Appendix 24.2 “presents the model output in standard format,” but there are no comprehensive and clearly communicated inputs to the model to allow the reader to fully understand the assumptions that were used. The output in 24.2 contains page after page of numbers with no engineering units and the same cryptic IDs over and over with different numbers, which is completely meaningless. If this is “standard output” it is worthless without a clearer presentation and context.

6. The continued use of fossil fuel gas in buildings for heating, clearly fails the SEIR’s Energy section criteria for “wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary” use of energy, a factor that is independent of GHG emissions. No response (in L05.07) was offered to this claim other than the same misplaced “prevailing best practices” GHG argument.

There is also an argument that the 2022 CA code update still allows gas infrastructure, but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary, as considered by the SEIR. There are many things that would be allowed by code that would easily be considered wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary. Several past Specific Plan projects included outdoor gas-fired fire pits. Burning fossil fuels for ambiance and "heating" the outdoors is “wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary” and should not be allowed by the plan. Outdoor restaurant gas heaters are similarly wasteful and there are superior ways to provide outdoor comfort with less energy and cleaner emissions, such as electrically heating outdoor furniture to more directly provide heat and comfort to people rather than sending the majority of the heat to the outdoor environment where it helps no one.

7. The decision to stick with a status quo approach to new construction (same plan as 2014), instead of more thoughtful, future-minded, development, will lead to costly future burdens, in the form of high retrofit costs and ongoing future GHG emissions that are increasingly impactful and costly to mitigate. This is true for any continued investments in gas infrastructure that will increase future costs of operation and retrofit, but also for plumbing considerations for drain (separate greywater) and water supply separate uses that can reuse non-potable water (like irrigation and toilets).

8. Embodied GHG emissions in construction materials are declared out of the scope in the SEIR. While it may be true that these have been neglected from inclusion in EIRs so far, does it make the impacts any less valid? The argument seems to be we acknowledge these are impacts, but others don’t count them, so we aren’t going to count them either.

In other words, we will do what we can get away with, and not what we know to be right. Act to own up to the embodied GHG emissions of construction so we can start to act to reduce them. Otherwise, there is no incentive to control this critical source of Agenda Packet Page 165 of 263
emissions.

9. The EV charging criteria to be specific about what is required when providing raceways for future installation of EV charging equipment. What is the criteria to establish that the electrical service equipment (service/transformer capacity, service panel capacity, and raceway conduit size) are sufficient to meet the load of the built out EV charging infrastructure?
The general sense from the responses provided to the public comments, is that the SEIR represents the status quo and that is good enough. The code allows gas, so we will allow gas.

Net zero doesn’t mean excluding options but giving choices to others to do what they want.

This is a highly flawed shirking of responsibility. Such an argument essentially comes down to the SPASP and SEIR proclaiming that GHG emissions are “somebody else’s problem.” Do you want to put your name on a declaration that acting on the climate emergency is somebody else’s problem? If everyone thinks this way, how will we get anything done to protect our future?
This Specific Plan can not primarily rely on transit oriented infill development as the contribution to climate action. There needs to be a comprehensive climate-friendly approach to developing our future buildings and infrastructure with thoughtful attention to the impacts these buildings will have for decades to come. Transit oriented infill development is a good thing and we desperately need it, but it is not sufficiently good for the climate, in and of itself.

It needs to be delivered with a comprehensive view of the required performance to meet environmental needs over the next 50-100 years, if we are going to have any hope of having both a built environment and a natural environment that continues to support human needs in the future.

There have been attempts to justify no further action by saying that the technology or the industry isn’t ready to ramp up with full electrification, or that the compromise measures in the 2022 building code updates will adequately address climate concerns (even though the multifamily changes relevant to the SPASP are less stringent than the single family change in the 2022 code). These are lazy excuses and just plain wrong. A large portion of the country has used all-electric buildings for decades, because there is not extensive gas infrastructure in all areas. CA is an outlier in the heavy reliance on fossil gas infrastructure. The equipment, technology and know-how to build all-electric buildings is all readily available, and it costs less to do so. The small fraction of demand in new construction, and the even smaller fraction of new construction in El Cerrito, is a negligible stress on the grid and the market for electric appliances, but still represents an important market signal of changing trajectories and it is a meaningful contribution to climate action that will avoid decades of emissions and avoid future retrofits cost burdens.

When it comes to change, there are always leaders and foot draggers. The state legislation has been providing strong leadership, but this progress continues to be slowed down by legacy vested interests dragging their feet. Merely relying on CA state leadership alone is succumbing to the foot dragger’s pace and not being true to the commitment and responsibility to act on the Climate Emergency independently in El Cerrito, as adopted by Council in 2019. We need to demonstrate the environmental leadership that we claim to have, rather than just taking the compromises that come from others’ work without any effort to take local action.

Below are not my words but those of the CA governor Gavin Newsom at the signing of 2022 Climate legislation.

Agenda Packet Page 166 of 263
“We’re not interested in doubling down on stupid,”
“We’re not interested in investing in the industries that have created the problems that we’re trying to mitigate. That’s just profoundly ridiculous.” “We’re moving in a completely new direction and I couldn’t be more proud and excited.”
- Governor Gavin Newsom, Sept. 16th, 2022, at signing of 2022 climate bills A vote to recommend the Specific Plan and Final SEIR without climate action amendments, is a vote to keep putting holes in our sinking boat and being a burden to our global community.

Instead, we need to stop making new holes so we can start actively patching up old ones and make some headway on keeping ourselves afloat, as well as the global community with which we are inextricably intertwined.

Thanks for your time and consideration,
Howdy Goudey
El Cerrito
Agenda Packet Page 167 of 263
From: Denice A Dennis
To: Gabe Quinto; Janet Abelson; Tessa Rudnick; Paul Fadelli; Lisa Motoyama Cc: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comment 7A San Pablo Ave Specific Plan Update Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 2:39:07 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear Mayor Quinto and Councilmembers,
I am writing on behalf of 350 Contra Costa, a grassroots organization committed to education and action on the climate emergency.

Please adopt the San Pablo Specific Plan Update (SPSPU) with the amendments recommended by the Environmental Quality Committee and the Planning Commission. As described in the staff report on the SPSPU, these recommendations included that the SEIR not be certified without addressing additional climate actions to meet stated climate goals, including building electrification for all new buildings and increased EV infrastructure readiness.

Sixty-one jurisdictions in California have passed new building electrification ordinances, including Contra Costa County, Martinez, Hercules, and Richmond. Jurisdictions have the option, and perhaps even the responsibility given the climate emergency, to create policies requiring ALL new buildings to be all electric. The City Council has the option to include all building types and does not need to limit it to residential units with 5 units or more and certain commercial buildings. Compared to natural gas infrastructure, it is more cost effective to build all-electric buildings. Building all-electric now would also mean that owners would not need to do expensive retrofits in the future. An infeasibility waiver system could be provided for those commercial buildings or restaurants that needed a rare exception.

The 2022 CalGreen Building Code standards provide a minimum requirement for EV charging capabilities in multifamily homes. Many jurisdictions improve on this minimum, to ensure that any new building has the infrastructure in place for future growth of EV vehicles. 350 Contra Costa recommends that every dwelling unit with a parking space should ensure such space(s) either be EV Ready or EV Capable. Doing so would be more cost effective when the building is being constructed than after it is built.

The City adopted a Climate Emergency Resolution over 3 years ago in 2019. Since that time, there has been no movement on an update to the Climate Action Plan or meaningful greenhouse gas emissions reductions on the scale that is required at this time. We strongly urge the City Council to take the action on Building Electrification for all new buildings as soon as possible, starting now with this San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update. Please do not delay until after completion of a new Climate Action Plan to address the climate emergency.

Toward health for all,
Denice A. Dennis, MPH
Agenda Packet Page 168 of 263
From: Allison Cooper
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments – Agenda Item #7
Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 2:40:15 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

El Cerrito City Councilmembers,
I'm writing in support of the proposed EV readiness requirements and ban on natural gas in new residential construction proposed for inclusion in the San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan.

If our City is serious about taking action on the climate emergency in El Cerrito — as recognized by City Council in 2019 — this is the bare minimum that can be done. Allelectric buildings are absolutely necessary not just for the longevity of our planet, but also — as all of California moves in this direction — as an investment in the future affordability of El Cerrito living, as natural gas inevitably becomes rarer and its infrastructure more and more cumbersome to maintain.

With or without El Cerrito's commitment, the market is moving toward all-electric anyway, because it also protects consumers in addition to aiding climate change mitigation efforts.

Recent studies have shown the negative health impacts of natural gas cooking, and making this a requirement will protect El Cerrito residents from costly retrofits in the future when we run out of fossil fuels. The momentum of electrification actions by other jurisdictions signal that it would be negligent not to act similarly now in El Cerrito.

Finally, I want to note that I'd love to see this go further; I'd ask City Council to please consider expanding this all-electric mandate to cover not just certain residential and hotel developments, but also all other types of new buildings, and even to embrace policy innovations many other Californian cities have implemented encouraging retrofits of existing buildings to all-electric when being renovated as well.

Thank you for your time and support of climate change mitigation efforts in El Cerrito, Allison, El Cerrito resident
Agenda Packet Page 169 of 263
From:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Date:

Danielle Westbrook
City Clerk
Gabe Quinto; Janet Abelson; Tessa Rudnick; Paul Fadelli; Lisa Motoyama Public Comments – Agenda Item #7
Tuesday, November 15, 2022 1:09:50 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Dear Mayor Quinto, Mayor Pro Tem Motoyama, and City Council Members Fadelli, Abelson and Rudnick:

I am writing as an El Cerrito resident to urge you to support the Planning Commission’s recommended amendments to the San Pablo Area Specific Plan Update, and to incorporate requirements for all-electric new construction and more robust electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in new construction.

In El Cerrito’s August 2019 Climate Emergency Resolution, the city committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible. Requiring all-electric new construction is an important first step towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions in El Cerrito. Discontinuing use of natural gas appliances and natural gas plumping is recognized in the BAAQMD report of April 2022 (CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans) as a core step in meeting California’s goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. Further, buildings that do not use natural gas are more economical and cost-effective to build (i.e., less expensive), while also being healthier and safer for residents and other community members.

El Cerrito's staff position on this BAAQMD resolution is that it need not apply to the SPASP Update and SEIR as the start of their development predates release of the report. It is certainly reasonable to not hold projects that have already progressed past a certain stage of planning or entitlement to an all-electric requirement. But going forward, an all-electric requirement for new buildings is one of many steps that El Cerrito should take to fulfill its commitment to addressing the Climate Emergency.

El Cerrito staff have voiced concerns about potential lawsuits arising in response to requiring all-electric new construction. Berkeley was the first jurisdiction in California to instate a natural gas ban. And since Berkeley’s ordinance was challenged, 61 other jurisdictions in California have passed their own all-electric new construction ordinances, including Contra Costa County, Hercules and Martinez, without any subsequent legal challenges. In requiring all-electric new construction, El Cerrito is working in partnership with many other cities in the state – the precedent has already been set; failure to act in accordance will be a failure on the city's part to seek impactful solutions that address the Climate Emergency.

In addition to requirements for all-electric new construction, the Planning Commission also recommends more robust EV charging infrastructure in new buildings; this recommendation is important for addressing the greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, which contributed

50.9% of El Cerrito’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2005. Not only California but also the federal government are committed to a rapid transition from gasoline powered vehicles to zero-emission vehicles, primarily EVs. This transition will be quicker if prospective purchasers of EVs are confident that they will have the ability to charge their vehicles at their homes.

I greatly appreciate the work of the EQC and the Planning Commission, and call upon the El Cerrito City Council to accept their recommendations and take bold action to address the Climate Emergency.

With gratitude for your time and consideration,
Danielle Watters Westbrook
El Cerrito resident Agenda Packet Page 170 of 263
From: Robert Gould
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments – Not on Agenda or Public Comments – Agenda Item # 7.A.

Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 2:44:50 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Statement of Dr. Robert M. Gould (SF Bay PSR): El Cerrito, November 15, 2022 Dear Mayor Quinto and El Cerrito City Council Members,
I’m Dr. Robert M. Gould. After working as a Pathologist at San Jose Kaiser for over 30 years, since 2012, I’ve been an Associate Adjunct Professor at UCSF School of Medicine, working as a Collaborator in our Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment (PRHE). Since 1989 I’ve also been President of San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), for which I’m submitting this testimony today, representing many hundreds of health professionals throughout our region, who speak for the health of our patients and communities, who are increasingly impacted by the unfolding public and environmental health impacts of global warming, and clearly connected issues of air pollution. In this capacity, I am urging you to approve the most farreaching standards possible for promoting building electrification.

The most recent assessment by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is unequivocal in its call for urgent action to ensure an energy efficient and fossil free future. In the SF Bay Area, we witness the intersecting impacts of our pandemic and climate crisis, having suffered through our recent wildfire seasons, with the resultant smoke harming our overall health while increasing the toll of COVID, especially among already increasingly over-burdened communities who are poor and of color.

Promoting building electrification, and moving toward ending our reliance on gas appliances is health protective, not only for the climate benefits, but also because gas stoves and other appliances can be a large source of toxic pollution in homes, reaching levels of pollution that would be illegal in outdoor settings. Children, especially those of color, are particularly at risk of respiratory Agenda Packet Page 171 of 263
illnesses, such as asthma, associated with gas appliance pollution, and lower income households may be at higher risk of exposure.

So, as one example, a 2013 meta-analysis looking at the association between gas stoves and childhood asthma found children in homes with gas stoves have a 42% increased risk of experiencing asthma symptoms (current asthma), a 24% increased risk of ever being diagnosed with asthma by a doctor (lifetime asthma), and an overall 32% increased risk of both current and lifetime asthma.

In addition, there is mounting evidence linking combustion related air pollution with adverse brain development. A 2009 study found evidence that infant through preschool-age early-life exposure (through age four) to indoor air pollution from gas appliances may be related to impaired cognitive function and may increase the risk of developing attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms.

These health concerns have just been underscored by a new scientific report demonstrating that gas piped into millions of California homes contains hazardous air pollutants including benzene, a chemical strongly linked to malignancies such as leukemia, and that each year California gas appliances and infrastructure leak the same amount of benzene as is emitted by nearly 60,000 cars. (See: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/20/climate/gas-stovebenzene-california.html?partner=slack&smid=sl-share; and https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.2c02581)
Accordingly, we strongly urge you to support the Planning Commission's recommended amendments to the San Pablo Area Specific Plan Update that incorporates requirements for all-electric new construction and more robust EV charging infrastructure. Such important measures can accomplish much toward reducing health and climate risks, while contributing greatly toward creating healthier homes and a more resilient community.

By adopting these amendments, El Cerrito would join many other cities in California who have already adopted electric requirements for new construction that avoid new fossil gas use, in recognition of numerous benefits to community health, safety, and a stable climate future afforded by this Agenda Packet Page 172 of 263
transformation.

In conclusion, we at SF Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility call on you to use this critical opportunity to demonstrate El Cerrito’s leadership and commitment to rapidly develop the more economical, pollution-free buildings we need now for the optimal public, environmental and climate health we and future generations so deserve.

Sincerely,
Robert M. Gould, MD
President, San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility Agenda Packet Page 173 of 263
From: Nerisa de Jesus
To: City Clerk
Subject: Public Comments - Agenda item #7
Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 10:09:31 PM
Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.

Hello EC city council members,
I was scheduled to speak in the public comment time for this item, but could not make it to that point in the meeting - it was a packed agenda! Thanks to the City Clerk for allowing this late email.

I wanted to express my support for the Planning and EQ committees' amendments to the SP plan. It is clear now that all building infrastructures need to move to electric and in support of EV vehicles. To ignore what is happening in real time all around us in favor of old plans/old thinking, is to do a disservice to El Cerrito's future - the buildings will be around for a long time. Any new construction you approve that does not meet the standards we all see coming and are already going into effect at neighboring communities is to pass on huge retrofitting costs to the future. Please approve the suggested amendments and look to make livable, functioning buildings part of the SP plan.

Thank you,
Nerisa de Jesus
El Cerrito resident
Agenda Packet Page 174 of 263
Agenda Item No. 6.B.

Agenda Packet Page 175 of 263
El Cerrito
Police
2021 in Review
Paul Keith – El Cerrito Police
November 15, 2022
Agenda Packet Page 176 of 263
Mission

PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY,

SOLVE CRIME,

AND PURSUE JUSTICE
Agenda Packet Page 177 of 263
MADD Awards
Agenda Packet Page 178 of 263
Sergeant Scott Cliatt Retires
Agenda Packet Page 179 of 263
Law Enforcement Torch Run for Special Olympics
Agenda Packet Page 180 of 263
2021 Areas of Focus
• Pandemic Recovery
• Retail Theft
• Catalytic Converter and Vehicle Theft
Agenda Packet Page 181 of 263
Arrest Trends
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
2018 2019 2020 2021
Total Arrests
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Other
White
Agenda Packet Page 182 of 263
UOF Trends
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 # of UoF Incidents # of times Force Used
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
Agenda Packet Page 183 of 263
Internal Affairs Investigations
0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
2018 2019 2020 2021
Internal External
Agenda Packet Page 184 of 263
2021 Statistics
• Larceny
• Burglary
• Robbery
Agenda Packet Page 185 of 263
Larceny Trend
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Larceny
Agenda Packet Page 186 of 263
Burglary Trend
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Burglary
Agenda Packet Page 187 of 263
Robbery Trend
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Robbery
Agenda Packet Page 188 of 263
Annual
Updates
• Sanctuary City • Training • No collaborations
with U.S.

Immigrations and
Customs
Enforcement in
2021
• Body Worn Cameras • Audits • Internal
Investigations
• Training
Agenda Packet Page 189 of 263
Work in Progress
• Recruiting and Retention Focus
• New Collaboration with Contra Costa County Public Defender • Youth Early Intervention Program (YEIP)
• Contra Costa County Behavioral Health – Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime (A3) • Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Camera Systems
• Traffic Enforcement Unit
Agenda Packet Page 190 of 263
El Cerrito
Police 2021 in
Review
Paul Keith – El Cerrito Police
November 15, 2022
[email protected]
Agenda Packet Page 191 of 263
Agenda Packet Page 192 of 263
1 Memorandum
Date: November 15, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
From: Sean Moss, Planning Manager
Subject: Errata
This document lists all the changes to the San Pablo Specific Plan since the release of the October Final Draft Specific Plan. These changes are minor and do not represent significant changes. They are minor corrections or clarifications. Staff has worked diligently to identify each place that these changes may occur however, failure to note each place in these documents where these changes occur, does not preclude staff from making these corrections at a later date.

Strikethrough indicates deletion; red indicates insertion

SAN PABLO AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN

Page 02 ends

El Cerrito City CouncilNovember 15, 2022

El Cerrito City Council
November 15, 2022