See Zegeer study (Safety Effects of Marked vs. Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations) for additional guidance regarding when to install a marked crosswalk.
25% 90% High
22 NS21PB Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations (with enhanced safety features) Non-signalized intersections where pedestrians are known to be crossing intersections that involve significant vehicular traffic. They are especially important at school crossings and intersections with turn pockets.flashing beacons, curb extensions, advanced "stop" or "yield" markings, and other safety features should be added to complement the standard crossing elements. 35% 90% Medium 23 NS22PB Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) includes pedestrian-activated flashing lights and additional signage that enhance the visibility of marked crosswalks and alert motorists to pedestrian crossings. It uses an irregular flash pattern that is similar to emergency flashers on police vehicles. RRFBs are installed at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings. 35% 90% Medium
24 NS23PB Install Pedestrian Signal (including Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (HAWK)) Intersections noted as having a history of pedestrian vs. vehicle crashes and in areas where the likelihood of the pedestrian presence is high. Corridors should also be assessed to determine if there are adequate safe opportunities for non-motorists to cross and if a pedestrian signal, or a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) (also called High-Intensity Activated crossWalK beacon (HAWK)) are needed to provide an active warning to motorists when a pedestrian is in the crosswalk. 55% 90% Low
Countermeasures for Roadway Segments
Sr. No. Code Countermeasure Name CM Description CRF Federal Funding Systemic Approach
Opportunity
1 R01 Add Segment Lighting Provision of lighting along roadways. 35% 90% Medium 2 R02 Remove or relocate fixed objects outside of Clear Recovery Zone Known locations or roadway segments prone to collisions with fixed objects such as utility poles, drainage structures, trees, and other fixed objects, such as the outside of a curve, end of lane drops, and in traffic islands. A clear recovery zone should be developed on every roadway, as space is available. In situations where public right-of-way is limited, steps should be taken to request assistance from property owners, as appropriate.
35% 90% High
3 R03 Install Median Barrier
Areas where crash history indicates drivers are unintentionally crossing the median and the cross-overs are resulting in high severity crashes. The installation of median barriers can increase the number of PDO and non-severe injuries. The net result in safety from this countermeasure is connected more to reducing the severity of crashes not the number of crashes. 25% 90% Medium
4 R04 Install Guardrail
Guardrail is installed to reduce the severity of lane departure crashes. However, guardrail can reduce crash severity only for those conditions where striking the guardrail is less severe than going down an embankment or striking a fixed object. Guardrail should only be installed where it is clear that crash severity will be reduced, or there is a history of run-off-the-road crashes at a given location that have resulted in severe crashes.
25% 90% High
5 R05 Install impact attenuators
Impact attenuators are typically used to shield rigid roadside objects such as concrete barrier ends, steel guardrail ends and bridge pillars from oncoming automobiles. Attenuators should only be installed where it is impractical for the objects to be removed. 25% 90% High 6 R06 Flatten side slopes
Roadways experiencing frequent lane departure crashes that result in roll-over type crashes as a result of the roadway slope being so severe as to not accommodate a reasonable degree of driver correction. When there is a need to reduce the severity of lane departure crashes without installing a barrier system that could result in increased numbers of crashes. 30% 90% Medium
7 R07 Flatten side slopes and remove guardrail
Locations where high number of crashes originate as a lane departure and result in collision with guardrail or a fixed object located on the side slope shielded by guardrail. The guardrail may or may not meet current standards. Even though guardrails are generally installed to reduce the severity of departure crashes, they still can result in severe crashes in some locations. 40% 90% Medium
8 R08 Install raised median
Areas experiencing head-on collisions that may be affected by both the number of vehicles that cross the centerline and by the speed of oncoming vehicles. Installing a raised median is a more restrictive approach in that it represents a more rigid barrier between opposing traffic.
25% 90% Medium
9 R09 Install median (flush)
Areas experiencing head-on collisions that may be affected by both the number of vehicles that cross the centerline and by the speed of oncoming vehicles. Roadways with oversized lanes offer an opportunity to restripe the roadway to reduce the lanes to standard widths and use the extra width for the median.
15% 90% Medium
10 R10PB Install pedestrian median fencing
Roadway segments with high pedestrian-generators and pedestrian-destinations nearby (e.g. transit stops) may experience a high volume of pedestrians J-walking across the travel lanes at mid-block locations instead of walking to the nearest intersection or designated mid-block crossing. When this safety issue cannot be mitigated with shoulder, sidewalk and/or crossing treatments, then installing a continuous pedestrian barrier in the median may be a viable solution. 35% 90% Low
261
11 R11 Install acceleration/ deceleration lanes
Areas proven to have crashes that are the result of drivers not being able to turn onto a high speed roadway to accelerate until the desired roadway speed is reached and areas that do not provide the opportunity to safety decelerate to negotiate a turning movement.
25% 90% Low
12 R12 Widen lane (initially less than 10 ft) Horizontal curves or tangents and low speed or high speed roadways identified as having lane departure crashes, sideswipe or headon crashes that can be attributed to an existing pavement width less than 10 feet. 25% 90% Medium 13 R13 Add two-way left-turn lane (without reducing travel lanes) Roadways having a high frequency of drivers being rear-ended while attempting to make a left turn across oncoming traffic. Also can be effective for drivers crossing the centerline of an undivided multilane roadway inadvertently. 30% 90% Medium 14 R14 Road Diet (Reduce travel lanes from 4 to 3 and add a two way left-turn and bike lanes) Areas noted as having a higher frequency of head-on, left-turn, and rear-end crashes with traffic volumes that can be handled by only 2 free flowing lanes. Using this strategy in locations with traffic volumes that are too high could result in diversion of traffic to routes less safe than the original four-lane design.
30% 90% Medium
15 R15 Widen shoulder
Roadways that have a frequent incidence of vehicles leaving the travel lane resulting in an unsuccessful attempt to reenter the roadway. The probability of a safe recovery is increased if an errant vehicle is provided with an increased paved area in which to initiate such a recovery.
30% 90% Medium
16 R16 Curve Shoulder widening (Outside Only) Roadway curves noted as having frequent lane departure crashes due to inadequate or no shoulders, resulting in an unsuccessful attempt to reenter the roadway. 45% 90% Medium
17 R17 Improve horizontal alignment (flatten curves)
Roadways with horizontal curves that have experienced lane departure crashes as a result of a roadway segment having compound curves or a severe radius. This strategy should generally be considered only when less expensive strategies involving clearing of specific sight obstructions or modifying traffic control devices have been tried and have failed to ameliorate the crash patterns. 50% 90% Low 18 R18 Flatten crest vertical curve
The target for this strategy is usually unsignalized intersections with restricted sight distance due to vertical geometry and with patterns of crashes related to that lack of sight distance that cannot be ameliorated by less expensive methods. This strategy should generally be considered only when less expensive strategies involving clearing of specific sight obstructions or modifying traffic control devices have been tried and have failed to ameliorate the crash patterns. 25% 90% Low
19 R19 Improve curve superelevation Roadways noted as having frequent lane departure crashes and inadequate or no superelevation. Safety can be enhanced when the superelevation is improved or restored along curves where the actual superelevation is less than the optimal. 45% 90% Medium 20 R20 Convert from two-way to one-way traffic
One-way streets can offer improved signal timing and accommodate odd-spaced signals. One-way streets can simplify crossings for pedestrians, who must look for traffic in only one direction. While studies have shown that conversion of two-way streets to one-way generally reduces pedestrian crashes and the number of conflict points, one-way streets tend to have higher speeds which creates new problems.
35% 90% Medium
21 R21 Improve pavement friction (High Friction Surface Treatments) Improving the skid resistance at locations with high frequencies of wet road crashes and/or failure to stop crashes 55% 90% High 22 R22 Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning) Additional or new signage can address crashes caused by lack of driver awareness or complaince of roadway signing. 15% 90% Very High 23 R23 Install chevron signs on horizontal curves Roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes on relatively sharp curves during periods of light and darkness. 90% 24 R24 Install curve advance warning signs Addition of advance curve warning signs; may also include horizontal alignment and/or advisory speed warning signs 25% 90% Very High 25 R25 Install curve advance warning signs (flashing beacon) Roadways that have an unacceptable level of crashes on relatively sharp curves. Flashing beacons in conjunction with warning signs should only be used on horizontal curves that have an established severe crash history to help maintain their effectiveness. 40% 90% Very High 26 R26 Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs Includes the addition of dynamic speed warning signs (also known as Radar Speed Feedback Signs) 30% 90% High 27 R27 Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers Installation of delineators, reflectors and/or object markers are intended to warn drivers of an approaching curve or fixed object that cannot easily be removed. 15% 90% Very High
28 R28 Install edge-lines and centerlines
Any road with a history of run-off-road right, head-on, opposite-direction-sideswipe, or run-off-road-left crashes is a candidate for this treatment -install where the existing lane delineation is not sufficient to assist the motorist in understanding the existing limits of the roadway. Depending on the width of the roadway, various combinations of edge line and/or center line pavement markings may be the most appropriate.
25% 90% Very High
29 R29 Install no-passing line
Roadways that have a high percentage of head-on crashes suggesting that many head-on crashes may relate to failed passing maneuvers. No-passing lines should be installed where drivers "passing sight distance" is not available due to horizontal or vertical obstructions.
45% 90% Very High
30 R30 Install centerline rumble strips/stripes Center Line rumble strips/stripes can be used on virtually any roadway – especially those with a history of head-on crashes. 20% 90% High 31 R31 Install edgeline rumble strips/stripes Shoulder and edge line milled rumble strips/stripes should be used on roads with a history of roadway departure crashes. 15% 90% High 32 R32PB Install bike lanes Roadway segments noted as having crashes between bicycles and vehicles or crashes that may be preventable with a buffer/shoulder. 35% 90% High
33 R33PB Install Separated Bike Lanes
Separated bikeways are most appropriate on streets with high volumes of bike traffic and/or high bike-vehicle collisions, presumably in an urban or suburban area. Separation types range from simple, painted buffers and flexible delineators, to more substantial separation measures including raised curbs, grade separation, bollards, planters, and parking lanes. 45% 90% High
34 R34PB Install sidewalk/pathway (to avoid walking along roadway) Areas noted as not having adequate or no sidewalks and a history of walking along roadway pedestrian crashes. In rural areas asphalt curbs and/or separated walkways may be appropriate. 80% 90% Medium 35 R35PB Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing (with enhanced safety features) Roadway segments with no controlled crossing for a significant distance in high-use midblock crossing areas and/or multilane roads locations. flashing beacons, curb extensions, medians and pedestrian crossing islands and/or other safety features should be added to complement the standard crossing elements.
35% 90% Medium
262
36 R36PB Install raised pedestrian crossing On lower-speed roadways, where pedestrians are known to be crossing roadways that involve significant vehicular traffic. 35% 90% Medium 37 R37PB Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) includes pedestrian-activated flashing lights and additional signage that enhance the visibility of marked crosswalks and alert motorists to pedestrian crossings. It uses an irregular flash pattern that is similar to emergency flashers on police vehicles. RRFBs are installed at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings 35% 90% Medium
38 R38 Install Animal Fencing At locations with high percent of vehicular/animal crashes (reactive) or where there is a known high percent of animals crossing due to migratory patterns (proactive). 80% 90% Medium
263
85 | P a g e O a k l e y L o c a l R o a d S a f e t y P l a n APPENDIX E: HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (HSIP)
ANALYZER (B/C RATIO CALCULATIONS)
264
86 | P a g e O a k l e y L o c a l R o a d S a f e t y P l a n APPENDIX F: ONGOING/PROPOSED ROADWAY SAFETY-RELATED
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF OAKLEY
265
Ongoing or Proposed Roadway Safety related Improvements in the City of Oakley Improvement Description Project
Phase
FY 2022-23 Street Repair and
Resurfacing Project
Citywide Street Repair and Resurfacing Design
Main Street/Rose Avenue
Intersection Improvement
Project
Signalization and the reconfiguration of the Main
Street/Rose Avenue Intersection
PrePlanning
Sellers Avenue Widening and
Improvement Project
This project will construct the section of Sellers Avenue from the intersection at Riverrock Drive, to the gate at the Oakley Regional Community Park site.
Planning
East Cypress Road Widening
(Knightson Avenue to Jersey
Island Road)
This project will install a signal at the intersection of East Cypress Road and Knightsen Avenue in addition to
widening and improving this intersection and East Cypress Road.
Construction
Laurel Road Resurfacing
Project (Empire Avenue to
O'Hara Avenue)
This project will repair and resurface Laurel Road from O'Hara Avenue to Empire Avenue.
TBD
FY 2021/22 Traffic Calming
Project
This project will construct traffic calming measures. TBD FY 2021/22 Traffic Signal
Modernization Project
This project will rehabilitate existing traffic signals.
O'Hara Avenue / Carpenter
Road Intersection
Improvement Project
This project will improve the traffic operations at this intersection by constructing dedicated left turn lanes on Carpenter Road on either side of O’Hara Avenue, installing video detection system and reconfiguring the striping at this intersection.
Design
Main Street / Cypress Road
Intersection Improvement
Project
The scope of this project include addition of a dedicated right turn lane from Main Street into East Cypress Road, asphalt resurfacing of the intersection and striping after the paving work has been completed.
TBD
Main Street / Delta Road
Intersection Signalization
Project
This project will install a traffic signal at Main Street / Delta Road intersection along with lane wideing and intercsetion improvements.
Design
Main Street / Brownstone
Road Intersection
Signalization Project
This project will install traffic signal at Main
Street/Brownstone Road intersection.
Design
266
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a resolution Accepting the work associated with the Construction Contract to Sun Light & Power for the construction of the City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project – Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Number 286
Background and Analysis
The City’s adopted FY 2023/24 CIP Budget designates funding for various citywide infrastructure repair and replacement projects. This is consistent with the City’s goals to improve the quality of the City’s public infrastructure and to enhance the quality of life for Oakley residents.
The CIP 286 project included installation of solar panels on the roof of the City Hall buildings.
The new solar power system for the City Hall buildings will offset 93% of electricity usage at City Hall. The project included extended inverter warranties (20 years) and six annual cleanings of the solar panels.
On September 13, 2022, the City Council awarded a contract to Sun Light & Power for the construction of the City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project – CIP 286. This work has been successfully completed by Sun Light & Power and City Hall buildings are using solar power to generate electricity.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goals.
Fiscal Impact
The authorized budget for the construction of this project was $549,517. This project was completed on time and within the authorized budget for a complete total cost of $548,581.
Pursuant to the contract documents, 5% of the accrued costs were withheld from the amount paid to the contractor. These funds are called “retention,” and are held until the end of the project to ensure that the contractor completes the project in a timely manner.
Approval of this item will authorize the release of the retention payment to the contractor.
The retention was already budgeted as part of the contract and change order approvals, so there is no additional fiscal impact associated with this action.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
267
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution accepting Capital Improvement Project Number 286 – City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project as constructed by Sun Light & Power to be complete, and to direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the project with the County Recorder.
Attachments
1) Resolution
2) Notice of Completion
268
Resolution No. __-24 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
ACCEPTING THE WORK AS COMPLETE BY SUN LIGHT & POWER, FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP) NUMBER 286 – CITY HALL
ROOFTOP SOLAR POWER PROJECT
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2022, by adopting Resolution No. 94-22, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Sun Light & Power, for the construction of the City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project - CIP Number 286; and WHEREAS, Sun Light & Power, has satisfied the contractual requirements necessary for the acceptance of the City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project - CIP Number 286, and the project is now deemed complete in the amount of $548,581.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project - CIP Number 286 is hereby accepted as complete.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a Notice of Completion for the City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project - CIP Number 286 with the County Recorder.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on the 12th of March 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
269
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk
City Of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
City Of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER’S USE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Capital Improvement Project Number 286 – City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
The CITY OF OAKLEY, a political subdivision of the State of California, did, on September 13, 2022, enter into an agreement with Sun Light & Power, for the construction of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Number 286 – City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project, with work located at 3231 Main Street in Oakley, CA.
The Owner’s nature of interest or estate in the property described below is in fee.
The work described in the contract documents was to furnish all material, labor, and equipment necessary to complete CIP Number 286 – City Hall Rooftop Solar Power Project.
On March 12, 2024, said contract as a whole was completed and the work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Oakley.
______________________________________________________________________
VERIFICATION
I have read the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed this 12th day of March 2024 at Oakley, California.
Date: ______________ By:
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
City of Oakley, California
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
§6103 NO FEE IS REQUIRED FOR THE
RECORDATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
270
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a resolution accepting the work associated withTNB Construction for the construction of Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project – Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Number 187 Background and Analysis
The City’s adopted Fiscal Year 2023/24 CIP Budget designates funding for various citywide infrastructure repair and replacement projects. This is consistent with the City’s goals to improve the quality of the City’s public infrastructure and to enhance the quality of life for Oakley residents.
On October 10, 2023, the City Council awarded a contract to TNB Construction for the construction of the Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project – CIP 187.
The CIP Number 187 project filled the bridge surface cracks to protect the steel reinforcement, constructed new concrete barrier and chain-link fence, filled cracks in the bridge soffit, and treated the bridge deck per Caltrans recommendations with a methacrylate coating.
This work has now been successfully completed by TNB Construction and the bridge is back in service.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goals.
Fiscal Impact
The authorized budget for the construction of this project was $324,980.50. This project was completed on time and within the authorized budget for a complete total cost of $310,580.50.
Pursuant to the contract documents, 5% of the accrued costs were withheld from the amount paid to the contractor. These funds are called “retention,” and are held until the end of the project to ensure that the contractor completes the project in a timely manner.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
271
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Approval of this item will authorize the release of the retention payment to the contractor.
The retention was already budgeted as part of the contract and change order approvals, so there is no additional fiscal impact associated with this action.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution accepting Capital Improvement Project Number 187 – Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project as constructed by TNB Construction to be complete, and to direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the project with the County Recorder.
Attachments
1) Resolution
2) Notice of Completion
272
Resolution No. __-24 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
ACCEPTING THE WORK AS COMPLETE BY TNB CONSTRUCTION, FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP) NUMBER 187 – MAIN STREET
BRIDGE REHABILITATION PROJECT AT CONTRA COSTA CANAL PROJECT WHEREAS, on October 10, 2023, by adopting Resolution No. 100-23, the City Council awarded a construction contract to TNB Construction, for the construction of the Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project - CIP Number 187; and
WHEREAS, TNB Construction, has satisfied the contractual requirements necessary for the acceptance of the Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project - CIP Number 187, and the project is now deemed complete in the amount of $310,580.50.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley, that the Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project - CIP Number 187 is hereby accepted as complete.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a Notice of Completion for the Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project - CIP Number 187 with the County Recorder.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on the 12th of March 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
273
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk
City Of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
City Of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER’S USE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
Capital Improvement Project Number 187 – Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
The CITY OF OAKLEY, a political subdivision of the State of California, did, on October 10, 2023, enter into an agreement with TNB Construction, for the construction of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Number 187 – Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project, with work located on Main Street near the intersection of Rose Avenue at the Contra Costa Canal.
The Owner’s nature of interest or estate in the property described below is in fee.
The work described in the contract documents was to furnish all material, labor, and equipment necessary to complete CIP Number 187 – Main Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project at Contra Costa Canal Project.
On March 12, 2024, said contract as a whole was completed and the work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Oakley.
______________________________________________________________________
VERIFICATION
I have read the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed this 12th day of March 2024 at Oakley, California.
Date: ______________ By:
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
City of Oakley, California
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
§6103 NO FEE IS REQUIRED FOR THE
RECORDATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
274
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director & City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution accepting the subdivision improvements associated with the Pheasant Meadows Subdivision 8736 and Vintner View Subdivision 8836 located along the east side of O’Hara Avenue south of Grapevine Lane and west of the Cinnamon Ridge Subdivision Background and Analysis
On May 8, 2006, the City of Oakley entered into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Forecast Land Investment, LLC., a California Liability Company, for the development of a residential subdivision, Subdivision 8736, known as Pheasant Meadows.
On May 24, 2016, the City of Oakley entered into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Forecast Land Investment, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, for the development of a residential subdivision, Subdivision 8836, known as Vintner View.
On September 14, 2020, Discovery Builders, Inc. filed an application requesting Design Review approval for the project titles, “Pheasant Meadows (8736) and Vintner View (8836) Design Review (DR 07-20).” Final Maps for these subdivisions were recorded in 2006 and 2016. APNs: 034-580-001 through -042, and 034-590-028 through -036.
The City of Oakley Public Works and Engineering staff has inspected the Subdivision Improvements and have determined the Developer has since completed all of the required improvements for O’Hara Avenue, Grapevine Lane, Mira Vista Drive, Pheasant Meadows Drive, Adora Lane, and Eagle Nest Drive. At this time, the Developer has requested that the City accept the improvements for maintenance. The Public Works and Engineering staff has completed a final inspection for all public improvements and has found them to be in substantial compliance with the approved improvement plans.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goals under Community Health and Safety Goal to build safe streets and healthy neighborhoods.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
275
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Fiscal Impact
Upon acceptance of the improvements, the City will be obligated to maintain the public infrastructure. Preventative street maintenance for public roadway improvements will be funded using Gas Tax. Landscape improvements along O’Hara Avenue will be maintained with Landscape and Lighting District Zone 3-23.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution accepting the subdivision improvements associated with the Pheasant Meadows and Vintner View Subdivisions and for the City to begin the maintenance of the public infrastructure for these subdivisions.
Attachments
1. Vicinity Map
2. Resolution
276
277
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY ACCEPTING THE
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH PHEASANT MEADOWS AND VINTNER VIEW SUBDIVISIONS 8736 AND 8836 LOCATED ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF O’HARA AVENUE, SOUTH OF GRAPEVINE LANE, AND WEST OF THE
CINNAMON RIDGE SUBDIVISION
WHEREAS, On May 8, 2006, the City of Oakley entered into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Forecast Land Investment, LLC., a California Liability Company, for the development of a residential subdivision, Subdivision 8736, known as Pheasant Meadows; and
WHEREAS, On May 24, 2016, the Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Forecast Land Investment, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, herein referred to as the (Developer), for the development of a residential subdivision, Subdivision 8836, known as Vintner View; and
WHEREAS, On September 14, 2020, Discovery Builders, Inc. filed an application requesting Design Review approval for the project titles, “Pheasant Meadows (8736) and Vintner View (8836) Design Review (DR 07-20).” Final Maps for these subdivisions were recorded in 2006 and 2016. APNs: 034-580-001 through -042, and 034-590-028 through -036; and
WHEREAS, the City of Oakley Public Works and Engineering staff has inspected the Subdivision Improvements and have determined the Developer has since completed all of the required improvements for O’Hara Avenue, Grapevine Lane, Mira Vista Drive, Pheasant Meadows Drive, Adora Lane, and Eagle Nest Drive. At this time, the Developer has requested that the City accept the improvements for maintenance. The Public Works and Engineering staff has completed a final inspection for all public improvements and has found them to be in substantial compliance with the approved improvement plans; WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution accepting the subdivision improvements associated with the Pheasant Meadows and Vintner View Subdivisions and for the City to begin the maintenance of the public infrastructure for these subdivisions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley as follows:
a) Accept the dedication for Eagle Nest Drive and Grapevine Lane for public use as recorded in Subdivision Vintner View (8836) in Map Book 528, Page 46, and b) Accept the dedication for O’Hara Avenue, Mira Vista Drive, Eagle Nest Drive Pheasant Meadows Drive, and Adora Lane for public use as recorded in Subdivision Pheasant Meadows (8736) in Map Book 490, Page 12, and 278
c) The roadway improvements for Grapevine Lane, Mira Vista Drive, Pheasant Meadows Drive, Adora Lane, and Eagle Nest Drive are accepted and begin the maintenance by the City, and
d) In accordance with the City Clerk’s Statement on the Subdivision Final Map, this portion of the map related to these roads, avenues, drives, or easements and right of way dedications shown on the map as dedicated to public use are accepted.
PASSED, APROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on this 12th day of March, 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
____________________
Anissa Wiilliams, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________ _____________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
279
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Adopt a resolution appointing Kai-Christian Torf to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee for the Remainder of the Current Four-Year Term Expiring August 11, 2025 Background and Analysis
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is a public agency formed by Contra Costa County voters in 1988 to manage the County’s transportation sales tax program and to do County-wide transportation planning. The CCTA indicates it “works to plan, fund, and implement innovative transit programs that strengthen our diverse communities and improve the lives of residents.” (https://ccta.net/about-us/what-we-do/) The CCTA has a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) to provide citizen perspective, participation and involvement. The CAC is made up of members appointed by each city and town in Contra Costa County, a member from the County, and three “at-large” members.
Staff has advertised for the vacancy position since the former appointed CCTA-CAC representative for Oakley resigned in late August 2023. Kai-Christian Torf recently applied for the position (Attachment 1). If appointed, service on the CCTA-CAC would be for the remainder of the current four-year term expiring August 11, 2025.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
Appointment to the Commission is consistent with the City’s Community and Collaborative Partnerships Goal.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact.
Staff Recommendation
Adopt a resolution appointing Kai-Christian Torf to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee for the remainder of the current four-year term expiring August 11, 2025.
Attachments
1. Application
2. Proposed Resolution
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
Resolution No. __-21 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
TO APPOINT KAI-CHRISTIAN TORF TO THE CONTRA COSTA
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR
THE REMAINDER OF THE CURRENT FOUR-YEAR TERM EXPIRING
AUGUST 11, 2025
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Oakley that Kai-Christian Torf is hereby appointed to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee for the remainder of the current four-year term expiring August 11, 2025.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12h day of March, 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTION:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
__________________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ ________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
289
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution approving Contract Amendment Number 1 with HMH Engineers, Inc. for On-Call Consulting Services Related to Development Engineering Support Services for Fiscal Year 2023/24 and Award of Contract for Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Development Engineering Support Services with HMH Engineers, Inc for Fiscal Years (FY) 2024/25 and 2025/26
Background and Analysis
The City of Oakley utilizes a wide range of consultants and contractors across all departments to augment City staff as needed to accommodate the workload activities.
One of the areas that this approach is used is in private development services. Since the volume of private development activity fluctuates with the overall economic climate of the region, the Community Development and Public Works Departments use staff augmentation as needed to process and manage the development project workloads.
The Public Works Department uses the services of a contract engineer to augment current staffing to provide expeditious service for private development projects. This approach gives the City flexibility and agility to adjust to the level of service needed by private developers.
HMH Engineers, Inc. started working with the City of Oakley performing staff augmentation, plan review services, engineering consultation, and land surveying services in July of 2019. In the years since, they have developed a great working relationship with City Engineering, Planning and Building Department Staff, and have a solid understanding of the City’s processes and helping assist the City in the approval of many key development projects.
There has been an increase in the volume of both residential and commercial development activities in Oakley. This includes some of the largest private development projects along the East Cypress Road corridor. These are large complex projects and are on a fast track for review and processing to get them to the start of the construction phase.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
290
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US HMH Engineers, Inc. have a specialized focus in the areas of residential and commercial private development engineering services. This firm has the proper staffing who will be able to provide City staff with timely and professional services in a cost-effective way. In addition, this firm is totally independent and has no affiliations with any of the development organizations and consultants who work within the City.
The services that HMH Engineers, Inc. will provide will include Development Plan review; Subdivision Improvement Agreement review, Review of Tentative and Final Maps and City Survey services; as well as the review of calculations and estimates for development projects.
On May 25, 2021, an agreement was executed between the City of Oakley and HMH Engineers, Inc. for on-call consulting services related to Development Engineering Support Services. The contract was limited to a not to exceed amount of $150,00 per fiscal year. Peer reviews of improvement plan design for private development projects have continued to increase, such as improvements within the East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan area. Staff have needed to increase the amount of work being performed by consultants for plan check services to meet development project timelines. As a result, staff are requesting an increase of $50,000 in the contract amount for FY 2023/24, for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $200,000.
In addition, HMH Engineers, Inc. has provided their statement of qualifications and continues to be the preferred consultant to help assist staff for FY 2024/25 and FY 2025/26 with the option to extend the contract for an additional two years to 2028 if work is performed satisfactorily. This contract would be for a not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 per Fiscal Year. The award of the Agreement is exempt from competitive bidding under Section 3.6.010 of the Oakley Municipal Code paragraph 1) which provides an exception for competitive bidding on “Contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services, such as, but not limited to, services rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers, and other specialized consultants”.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan for community health and safety by ensuring engineering review of various projects are maintained to preserve safety for all. Contracting engineering services also maintains a sustainable organization from the demand of varying schedules of multiple projects.
Fiscal Impact
Approval of the resolution will increase the not-to-exceed contract amount by $150,000 for FY 2023/24 for a total amount of $200,000. Approval of the resolution will also authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with HMH Engineers, Inc. with a 291
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 3
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US not -to-exceed amount of $200,000 per fiscal year through June 30, 2026, with the option to extend the agreement until 2028 if work is performed satisfactorily. Private Development projects will fully fund the engineering support services cost on an as needed basis. This contract will not require funding from the City’s General Fund.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the On-Call services agreement with HMH Engineers, Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Staff is also recommending that the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with HMH Engineers, Inc. for private development engineering support services for a not-toexceed amount of $200,000 per fiscal year through June 30, 2026, with the option of extending the agreement through June 30, 2028.
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Amendment Agreement No.1 for FY 2023/24
3. HMH Engineers, Inc. Proposal for Contract FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 292
Resolution No. __-24 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
APPROVING CONTRACT AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE AGREEMENT
WITH HMH ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ON-CALL ENGINEERING SUPPORT
SERVICES RELATED TO PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH HMH ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ON-CALL PRIVATE
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024/25 AND 2025/26 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THESE AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2021, the City executed an agreement with HMH Engineers, Inc. for Engineering Support Services related to private development projects with a not to exceed amount of $150,000 per fiscal year; and WHEREAS, after review of the expenditures to date for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 and projecting costs for these services for the remaining months of the fiscal year with the various private development projects slated to start construction; staff has determined that the original not to exceed amount of $150,000 is not sufficient to cover the necessary support services for these projects; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting an additional $50,000 be added to FY 2023/24 budget, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $200,000; and WHEREAS, the City of Oakley utilizes the services of consultants to provide support services on a wide range of projects where the scope and magnitude for many of the tasks are larger than what City staff can perform; and WHEREAS, HMH Engineers, Inc. has performed private development engineering support services for municipalities in the Bay Area in an exemplary way and can accommodate the City’s service needs. HMH Engineers, Inc. has provided professional engineering and surveying services to the City of Oakley since July 2019; and
WHEREAS, the award of the agreement is exempt from competitive bidding under Section 3.6.010 of the Oakley Municipal Code paragraph 1) which provides an exception for competitive bidding on “Contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services, such as, but not limited to, services rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers, and other specialized consultants”.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley that Contract Amendment Number 1 with HMH Engineers, Inc. is hereby approved for a not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 for FY 2023/24. A copy of the Contract Amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit A., and the OnCall Development Engineering Support Services proposal attached hereto as 293
Resolution No. __-24 Page 2
Exhibit B with HMH Engineers, Inc. for an amount not-to-exceed amount of $200,000.00 per fiscal year for FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 is hereby approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute these agreements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED, if at the end of the term, the services have been performed satisfactorily, the City Manager has the discretion to approve an extension of the On-Call Services agreement to June 30, 2028, under the same terms as the original agreement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on March 12, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
ATTEST: Anissa Williams, Mayor
______
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
294
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OAKLEY AND HMH ENGINEERS, INC. FOR ON-CALL SERVICES RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PRJOJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 This Amendment is entered into by and between the CITY OF OAKLEY, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”), and HMH ENGINEERS, INC., a California Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Contractor”), effective as of the 12TH day of March 2024.
RECITALS
A. On MAY 25, 2021, City and Consultant executed an Agreement for on-call consulting services related to private development project Engineering Support Services (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) in the amount of $150,000 per fiscal year; and, B. City and Consultant now desire that the following amendment be made to the Consultant services for FY 2023/2024: increase of $50,000 to the not-to-exceed contract amount from $150,000 per fiscal year to $200,000 for Fiscal Year 2023/24 to hereby be approved by the City Manager; and,
C. Except as provided herein, all other terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Oakley, a municipal corporation in the State of California, has authorized the execution of this Amendment in duplicate by its City Manager, Approved to as Form by the City Attorney and attested by its City Clerk as of the 12th day of March 2024, and the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed in duplicate.
City
City of Oakley, a municipal corporation
By:
Joshua McMurray, City Manager
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________________
Derek P. Cole, City Attorney
Consultant
HMH Engineers, Inc., a California Corporation
By:
David Wilson, President
295
296
SUCCESS BUILT ON SERVICE, QUALITY, &
COMMITMENT SINCE 1976
1570 OAKLAND ROAD SAN JOSE, CA 95131 | 408-487-2200 | HMHCA.COM planning ● civil engineering ● public works ● landscape architecture ● land surveying February 28, 2024
Kevin Rohani, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Oakley, Public Works & Engineering Department
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Re: Fiscal Year 2023/2024 On-Call Agreement between the City of Oakley and HMH Engineers, Inc., Contract Amendment Request
Dear Mr. Rohani:
As we enter the second half of the fiscal year, several larger projects such as Grand Cypress Preserve, Summer Lake North, and the Bridgehead Industrial Project will continue to have significant document preparation and review requirements, including increased City Surveyor responsibilities. In addition, ongoing coordination meetings are expected to continue as these projects are entitled, move into construction document phases, and ultimately continue to construction. If the current pace of development activity continues, we will exceed the initial $150,000 contract amount.
We estimate that an amendment to the amount of $50,000 will provide the additional budget needed to cover the increased workload.
Should you have any questions, please contact me directly at your convenience.
Sincerely,
HMH
Stephan Kuehn, P.E.
Vice President, Civil Engineering Manager
Contract Amendment Request 1 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS City of Oakley
297
SUCCESS BUILT ON SERVICE, QUALITY, &
COMMITMENT SINCE 1976
1570 OAKLAND ROAD SAN JOSE, CA 95131 | 408-487-2200 | HMHCA.COM planning ● civil engineering ● public works ● landscape architecture ● land surveying February 28, 2024
Kevin Rohani, P.E.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Oakley, Public Works & Engineering Department
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Re: FY 2024/2025 On-Call Agreement between the City of Oakley and HMH Engineers, Inc.
Dear Mr. Rohani:
HMH Engineers started working with the City of Oakley performing staff augmentation, plan review services, engineering consultation, and land surveying services in July of 2019. In the years since, we have developed a great working relationship with City Engineering, Planning and Building Department Staff, a solid understanding of the City’s processes, and have helped assist the City in the approval of many key development projects. Looking forward to fiscal year 2024/2025, we are prepared to continue in this effort. We are pleased to present the following Statement of Qualifications for your review and consideration. It is anticipated there will be a continued increased push from the development community for entitlement and construction document processing, and construction of significant portions of the East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan area.
HMH has added several key senior staff to assist with the anticipated workload and is prepared to help the City in meeting its review and delivery targets. The HMH staff included in the attached SOQ will be available as needed, their efforts coordinated directly by Stephan Kuehn, project manager for HMH.
Please review the enclosed material and feel free to reach out to me directly with any questions.
Sincerely,
HMH
Stephan Kuehn, P.E.
Vice President, Civil Engineering Manager
Encl: HMH Statement of Qualifications
2024 - 2025 On-Call Agreement 2 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS City of Oakley
298
3 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
addressed to...
DEAR KEVIN,
HMH is pleased to provide our Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) to the City of Oakley for on-call civil engineering review, survey & mapping review, stormwater control plan review, landscape architecture review, and staff augmentation services.
HMH has a successful history of providing services to municipal clients throughout both the Bay Area and the Contra Costa County region since 1976.
» AWARD-WINNING PROJECTS & EFFICIENT MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAMS Approximately half of our Bay Area projects belong to public agencies. HMH currently holds on-call contracts with several cities, counties, and transportation agencies including the City and County of Santa Clara, VTA, Midpeninsula Open Space District, and City of Livermore.
With a permanent staff of approximately 80 engineers, surveyors, and landscape architects, HMH has the staff availability and multi-disciplinary resources to handle projects with aggressive schedules and budgets. Our in-house staff will approach the projects with a strong commitment to meet each milestone as planned efficiently and expediently. The numbers prove it. Our approach has resulted over 3,500+ projects completed to date with multiple public and private projects winning awards. Our success is best reflected from 85% of our client base being returning clients.
Our staff has extensive experience and knowledge of municipal codes, the subdivision map act, master plan implementation, civil engineering design, construction document preparation and the permitting processing with public agencies. We have a thorough understanding of the local conditions, gained through research and coordination with local stakeholders. Our long-term relationships with local agency staff provide an advantage in navigating the complex permitting process.
» LOCAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPERTISE
A strong dedicated Project Manager (PM) is a prerequisite to coordinate effectively with the many stakeholders affected by the project and manage the team to deliver all phases of complex projects. Principal Stephan Kuehn, PE, will serve as HMH’s PM and is authorized to negotiate and execute a contract with the City on HMH’s behalf. Stephan has over 25 years of experience as the lead engineer and project manager for large master-planned residential communities, retail centers, industrial and institutional developments throughout the Bay Area. His detail-oriented approach provides practical solutions for project design from concept to construction. Stephan currently manages the Land Development Engineering group at HMH and is responsible for engineering design, client and governmental agency coordination, quality control, scheduling, and budgeting. Recently, Stephan has worked with the City of Oakley to provide staff augmentation and plan review services and has become familiar with the City’s application and review process which makes him ideally positioned to provide continued support. Through his work on other agency projects, Stephan has demonstrated his ability to implement complex projects and lead engineering teams in dynamic environments. Stephan’s style of Project Management is rooted in trust. He trusts his partners, his team and his staff to give their best and to be honest and pragmatic.
The additional members of HMH staff augmentation team consists of Surveying Manager Tracy Giorgetti, PLS/PE, Senior Civil Engineer Ryan Fong, PE, Civil Engineering Manager and Stormwater Professional, Alan Le, PE, QSD/P, CPSWQ, CPESC,and Civil Engineering Manager Joey Covey, PE.
Kevin Rohani, PE, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Public Works and Engineering Department
3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94510
Cover Letter STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
299
4 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
» PROJECT SCOPE AND DELIVERY:
We anticipate performing the required services primarily from our office in San Jose. HMH Staff will be available to meet with City of Oakley Staff as needed on a project-by-project basis, or for important stakeholder meetings. Field meetings and visits will be accommodated as requested.
In general, the following scope of services are anticipated:
1. Review of Planning Applications, including Tentative Maps, for Engineering compliance.
2. Prepare project Conditions of Approval for Engineering.
3. Subdivision Development Grading and Improvement Plan Review.
4. Onsite and off-site public improvement plan review.
5. Review of calculations and other documents provided by applicants for submitted projects.
6. Review project Engineering Estimate for Bonding and Fee calculations purposes.
7. Assist in the preparation of project Subdivision Improvement Agreements.
8. Assist in the review of project material submittals for conformance with City of Oakley Standard Details and Specifications.
9. Participate in project meetings as request by City staff.
10. Perform Final Map, Plat & Legal Description, and other survey document review and act as City Surveyor for the City of Oakley.
Our HMH team is truly excited to be considered by the City of Oakley for this contract. Should you have any questions about our qualifications, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to present our statement of qualifications.
Stephan Kuehn, PE
Vice President/CFO/Principal, Land Development Manager
[email protected] | 408.857.9410
Cover Letter STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
300
5 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
PRINCIPAL, LAND DEVELOPMENT
STEPHAN KUEHN, PE
Civil Engineer California #57808 · Building Industry Association · American Council of Engineering Companies · United States Green Building Council · Bay Area Certified Green Business
• CITY OF OAKLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, OAKLEY, CA
Stephan leads our City of Oakley Development Review consulting services throughout the planning and development processes. He assists during the entitlement process, from reviewing preliminary engineering designs and preparing conditions of approval to the engineering process, reviewing private and public improvement plans, grading plans, and fi nal maps, to job-site construction meetings and coordination. Stephan's experience with a variety of projects both public and private and knowledge of the industry help the City navigate any challenges that may come their way. • 237 INDUSTRIAL CENTER, SAN JOSE, CA
Stephan is leading the 50 MW Data Center and Light Industrial Project on 65 acres in North San Jose/Alviso.
This new facility, to be built in phases, is adjacent to Coyote Creek, Highway 237, and the San Jose Regional Wastewater Facility.
• COMMUNICATIONS HILL RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SPECIFIC PLAN, SAN JOSE, CA HMH is providing complete services that include conceptual site and grading plans; land use entitlement management and processing; preliminary and fi nal design for roadway and utility infrastructure; analysis and coordination with the City of San Jose for multi-modal transportation improvements; feasibility studies, and design for required off-site improvements; design and integration of regional stormwater mitigation facilities; Landscape Architectural design for residential neighborhoods; topographic surveys, mapping, and construction staking; and coordination between owner, agencies and developers.
• TESLA, PALO ALTO, CA
Stephan led the facility upgrades including parking lots, outbound logistics facility, and Free Trade Zone improvements in support of upcoming Tesla Model 3 production and delivery. • I-280/WOLFE ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT, CUPERTINO, CA Stephan is providing quality control and quality assurance for the civil engineering services for the project. The I-280/ Wolfe Road interchange is the primary point of access for the Apple Park Campus and Vallco Shopping Center, serving also as the gateway to the City of Cupertino. Working closely with the City and VTA, HMH will be seamlessly implementing complete streets elements and thorough consideration of the bicycle and pedestrian user experiences critical to the long-term success of the project.
• 87/CAPITOL EXPRESSWAY INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT, SAN JOSE, CA Stephan is providing quality control and quality assurance for the civil engineering services for the project. The 87/ Capitol Expressway interchange will improve vehicular access between northbound State Route 87 and Capitol Expressway, providing high-quality, convenient and comfortable accommodations for active transportation (bikes and pedestrians) and provide seamless connections between all modes of transportation. 30 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE | with HMH: 27 YEARS
B.S. Civil Engineering,
California Polytechnic
State University,
San Luis Obispo
»
«
» principal engineer for multiple large master planned residential communities, retail centers, industrial and institutional developments; responsible for design oversight, quality control, scheduling & budgeting. » detail-oriented approach provides practical solutions for project design and management from concept to construction, especially in high density and urban infi ll developments. » understands the inherent competition for space among project elements—emphasizes collaboration and coordination between consultants, agency staff, building offi cials and public works staff for effective negotiation and timely processing to gain approvals.
Staff Resumes STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
301
6 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
CIVIL ENGINEERING MANAGER
ALAN LE, PE, QSD/P, CPSWQ, CPSEC
Civil Engineer California #72243 · Certifi ed Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC) #5177 · Qualifi ed SWPPP Developer (QSD) & Qualifi ed SWPPP Practitioner #20397 · California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) · CASQA BMP Subcommittee Envirocert International Inc. (EIC)
• SOUTH OF FOREST NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS, SAN JOSE, CA Alan was the design engineer for the South of Forest Neighborhood Improvements project that was awarded the 2012 Project of the Year from the Silicon Valley Chapter of the American Public Works Association (APWA) in the category of Transportation Projects less than $5 million. The project consists of reconstruction of paved areas, curb and gutter, sidewalks, driveways, ADA ramps, traffi c calming devices upgrading over 11,000 LF of the existing deteriorated streets to current City standards.
• CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, MENLO PARK, CA
Alan’s experience also includes two years working for the City of Menlo Park Engineering Department where he gained valuable experience working on a variety of capital improvement projects including streetscape, traffi c calming, traffi c analysis, and street resurfacing. An example of Alan’s professional work involved the evaluation of the traffi c calming devices from design through installation to implementation for the Santa Cruz Avenue Trial Traffi c Calming Project.
• NILES BOULEVARD STREET & UTILITY REPLACEMENT, FREMONT, CA Alan provided stormwater solutions for the project. As part of the project, Alameda County Water District and Union Sanitary District upgraded the water and sewer mains within the roadway. HMH prepared the water main relocation plans, including contractor staging and laydown areas that will be subject to construction runoff controls. • NUEVO (LAWRENCE STATION), SANTA CLARA, CA
Alan is currently the design manager for the Lawrence Station project. This 29-acre project is a part of the 65 acres Lawrence Station Area Plan that consists of 988 residential units with 35,000 square feet of retail space and 3.3 acres of public parks and open spaces. The public parks and open spaces area were maximized with the use of over 21,000 square feet of Silva Cell as the stormwater treatment facility to treat both public and private stormwater. • AGRIHOOD, SANTA CLARA, CA
Alan managed and oversaw the design of the site improvements for this 5.80 acre mixed-use/residential and urban agriculture project includes 160 mixed-income apartments, 165 affordable senior apartments, 36 townhomes and approximately 1.5 acres of agricultural open space with rain harvesting system as a part of the stormwater quality solution.
• WESTFIELD VALLEY FAIR MALL, SAN JOSE/SANTA CLARA, CA
Alan managed and oversaw the design of the site improvements for the $1.1 billion revitalization work of the existing Valley Fair mall. This multi-phase mall expansion consists of 650,000 square feet of retail area addition and 3 parking garage structures which will provide 93,000 square feet of parking area. A combination of biotreatment facilities and 232,000 gallon stormwater harvesting system were used as the project stormwater quality solution to preserve the mall retail area as well as comply with the C.3 requirements. 22 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE | with HMH: 20 YEARS
B.S. Civil Engineering,
San Jose State University
» « » senior designer on a variety of projects including single and multi-family residential, roadway improvements, traffi c calming, storm drainage systems, domestic water systems, sanitary sewer systems, public park grading and drainage.
» designer and engineer, and prepares the SWPPP for many of the same projects.
Staff Resumes STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
302
7 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
• MARKET PARK, SAN JOSE, CA
Joey has provided engineering support for the 120-acre transit village project that includes 2,800 urban residential units (ranging from single family detached to high rise towers), mixed use and commercial developments (~300,000 square feet) regional trails, a public school, and riparian open space along both Coyote and Penitencia Creeks. Joey is supporting the design of on-site and off-site infrastructure as required including reconstruction and widening Berryessa Road into a 6-lane arterial roadway, vehicular bridge over Penitencia Creek, complete storm drain system with regional solution for stormwater runoff mitigation, major sanitary sewer diversion pipeline, offsetting improvements to surrounding roadways, and undergrounding existing overhead utilities. • RANCHO CALERA, CHOWCHILLA, CA
Joey is overseeing the design of public and private infrastructure for a large specfi c plan project located in Chowchilla, CA. He performed a detailed utility investigation and coordinated utility points of connection with the City of Chowchilla. The project consists of a mixture of residential, commercial, and civic land uses with a projected buildout population of approximately 6,000 residents. Rancho Calera spans 576 acres with 2,042 residential units and approximately 308,405 square feet of commercial space.
• CASTELLINA, MADERA COUNTY, CA
Joey is leading the engineering design efforts for this project. Castellina is a master-planned community located on approximately 792 acres about one mile north of the City of Madera in Madera County. The project area is located approximately three miles east of Highway 99 and is adjacent to the proposed high-speed rail. • BELMONT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, SAN JOSE, CA
Joey was responsible for designing the earthwork, public infrastructure, and private improvement plans for a 2.8-acre, 33 lot residential infi ll project located in San Jose. The detached single family homes front private streets along Edenvale Avenue. The project involved challenging perimeter conform designs, public street dedication and improvement, and an underground storm runoff detention vault.
• TESLA, PALO ALTO, CA
Joey provided civil engineering design and coordination services for the Tesla Model 3 Outbound Logistics Facility at the Tesla Plant in Fremont, CA. The project included new car staging areas, truck delivery lanes, free-trade zone improvements, and stormwater treatment facilities. This new facility will support Tesla’s Model 3 national production and delivery efforts.
• BRITTON MIDDLE SCHOOL, MORGAN HILL, CA
Joey is overseeing the coordination of civil engineering logistics across multiple teams for the Britton Middle School expansion project. Such items include ADA compliance, grading and drainage, and utility coordination. • FRESNO STATE STUDENT UNION BUILDING, FRESNO, CA
Joey is responsible for the grading and drainage design for the new Fresno State Student Union building. It included the demolition of the existing amphitheater and earthwork studies to balance the site. He coordinated several items with the project team, such as rerouting existing utilities, ADA compliance, and stormwater runoff mitigation. 11 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE | with HMH: 11 YEARS THE RELEVANT PROJECTS Civil Engineer California #85020
B.S. Civil Engineering,
Fresno State University
JOEY COVEY, PE
» « » main designs include hillside subdivisions, residential, commercial, mixed-use communities and road improvements.
» expertise includes street geometric improvements, stormwater management, underground utilities and site grading.
» experience consists of both large and small-scale projects throughout Northern California
CIVIL ENGINEERING MANAGER
Staff Resumes STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
303
8 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
• CITY OF OAKLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, OAKLEY, CA
Tracy led the survey teams on setting numerous control points, coordinating various offset stakes references, and conducting as-built utility surveys for the City Of Oakley Development Review. The team assisted during the entitlement process, from reviewing preliminary engineering designs and preparing conditions of approval to the engineering process, reviewing private and public improvement plans, grading plans, and fi nal maps, to job-site construction meetings and coordination. In addition, the team augmented city fi eld and offi ce surveying staff. • ARROYO ROAD TRAIL, LIVERMORE, CA
Tracy supervised topographic fi eld surveys and coordinated pothole and as-built utility surveys for the Arroyo Road Trail project. The new trail alignment would run in general between the existing vineyard rows and Wente Road and on existing vineyard maintenance access roads. The southernly trail segment beginning at Dry Creek would continue to run south for about 3/4 mile, align with the existing unpaved trail path inside Sycamore Grove Regional Park and connect to the existing Arroyo Del Valle Regional Trail.
• MARKET PARK, SAN JOSE, CA
Tracy was the Senior Land Surveyor for the multiphase Market Park project, which includes a proposed 3,000 housing units, two million square feet of offi ce space, 110,000 square feet of retail space, new infrastructure, two public parks, connections to regional trails, pedestrian greenways and improved roads, all clustered near a new Bay Area Rapid Transit train stop.
• OHLONE, SAN JOSE, CA
Tracy managed the land surveying efforts for Ohlone. Located between downtown San Jose and Santana Row, Silver at Ohlone is a multi-family residential project that is part of the Transit Oriented Development project called Ohlone.
The overall TOD project aims to include up to 800 residential units and over 0.27 acres of retail. The project is also ideally located along West San Carlos Street, which is a street that has been designated a TOD corridor and a planned bus rapid transit line by the City of San Jose and the Valley Transportation Authority. In addition to the development, The Ohlone will also deliver a 4-acre park to the City of San Jose that will include a picnic area, dog park, and more. • VTA ON-CALL, SAN JOSE, MILPITAS, CA
Tracy was the Senior Land Surveyor and now Survey Manager for HMH’s VTA on-call within San Jose and Milpitas, performing various survey functions on several projects through Task Orders issued on an “on-call” contract. Survey prepared and performed construction surveys, construction verifi cations, right-of-way staking, fi nalization of appraisal maps, GPS control surveys, and topographic design surveys. Additional surveying services included preparing exhibits as well as plat and legal descriptions.
26 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE | with HMH: 26 YEARS THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
PRINCIPAL, SURVEY MANAGER
TRACY GIORGETTI, PE/PLS
B.S. Civil Engineering,
Santa Clara University
»
«
Professional Land Surveyor California #8720 · Civil Engineer California #63214 · California Land Surveyors Association » civil engineering graduate who gained surveying experience early in her professional career--earned professional licenses in both disciplines making her unique and highly-valuable. » focuses on the oversight of all survey mapping including preparation of tract maps, ALTA/ASCM surveys, corner records, record of surveys, condominium plans and plat maps and legal descriptions.
Staff Resumes STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
304
9 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
• CASTELLINA, MADERA, CA
Ryan provided civil engineering support for the Castellina project alongside the survey crew. Castellina is a masterplanned community located on approximately 792 acres about one mile north of the City of Madera in Madera County. The project area is located approximately three miles east of Highway 99 and is adjacent to the proposed high-speed rail.
• COYOTE CREEK TRAIL - SINGLETON ROAD FISH BARRIER, STREAM RESTORATION, AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, SAN JOSE, CA Ryan provided civil engineering support of the trail at the grade crossing, 1,000 feet of Coyote Creek, and 600 feet of Singleton Road. The surveys were performed conventionally because an aerial topographic survey would not provide the necessary data due to heavy vegetation in and around the creek. The survey was performed based on NAVD88 vertical datum and NAD83 horizontal datum. Additional tasks completed for the project included surveying potholed utilities after they had been exposed by others, surveying and tagging trees in the project area, and researching the existing utilities and surveyed visible utilities in the project area. • BAY AREA PROJECTS, BAY AREA, CA
Ryan’s completed assignments at the County of Santa Clara include grading ordinance revisions, standard detail update, review of grading and drainage plans, retaining wall review and drainage calculation evaluation. Ryan has been involved with the conditional review and approval of a wide range of projects including single family homes, subdivisions, and commercial projects. Specifi c project experience includes: Stanford Concert Hall, Stanford Engineering Quad, and the Castro Valley Ranch Subdivision.
While Ryan was with the Town of Los Gatos, Parks and Public Works Department, he was involved with conditional review and approval of private land development projects. Projects included single family homes, subdivisions and mixed use projects. Ryan represented Parks and Public Works at Staff Technical Review, Development Review Committee and Planning Commission Meetings. Specifi c project experience includes: Los Gatos Luxury Cars and Sorellas by Summerhill Homes.
• VTA ON-CALL, SANTA CLARA, CA
Ryan completed survey assignments for the VTA On-Call Surveying Services. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority engaged HMH Engineers to perform various survey functions on several VTA projects through Task Orders issued on an “on-call” contract. For the Capitol Light Rail project, the team performed construction surveys, construction verifi cations, fi nalization of appraisal maps, GPS control survey, Record of Survey of fi nal monumentation of the project, plat and legal descriptions for right-of-way acquisition, temporary construction easements, utility easement acquisitions, and topographic design surveys.
20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE | with HMH: 7 YEARS THE RELEVANT PROJECTS
SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER
RYAN FONG, PE
B.S. Civil Engineering,
San Jose State University
» «
Civil Engineer California #85420
» land development and surveying experience includes thirteen years with the County of Santa Clara’s Surveyors’ Offi ce and Land Development Engineering.
» also spent over a year with the Town of Los Gatos, Parks and Public Works Department.
Staff Resumes STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
305
10 SUCCESS 📊 ✅
QUALITY-COMMITMENT-SERVICE
CHARGE RATE SCHEDULE
Per Hour
$270
$214
$198
$182
$174
Professional & Office
Principal
Civil Engineering, Land Surveying or Landscape Architect Manager Senior Civil Engineer, Land Surveyor, or Landscape Architect Project Civil Engineer, Land Surveyor, or Landscape Architect Engineer, Planner, Surveyor, or Landscape Designer
Printing, Reproductions & Materials at Cost, Plus 20%
Transportation at Cost, including mileage based upon IRS rates Other Outside Services & Subconsultants at Cost, Plus 20% Rates are subject to Adjustment July 1, 2024
Hourly Rates STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
City of Oakley
306
LAND PLANNING
LAND DEVELOPMENT
LAND SURVEYING
CIVIL ENGINEERING
PUBLIC WORKS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ARBORICULTURE
LAND USE ENTITLEMENTS
STORMWATER COMPLIANCE
1570 OAKLAND ROAD
SAN JOSE, CA 95131
hmhca.com
307
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a resolution approving Contract Amendment Number 1 with Park Engineering, Inc. for On-Call Consulting Services Related to Inspection Support Services for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 and Award of Contract for Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Inspection Support Services with Park Engineering, Inc for Fiscal Years 2024/25 and 2025/26
Background and Analysis
The City of Oakley utilizes a wide range of consultants and contractors across all departments to augment City staff as needed to accommodate the workload activities.
One of the areas that this approach is used is in private development services. Since the volume of private development activity fluctuates with the overall economic climate of the region, the Community Development and Public Works Departments use staff augmentation as needed to process and manage the development project workloads.
The Public Works Department uses the services of a contract inspector to augment current staffing to provide expeditious service for private development projects. This approach gives the City flexibility and agility to adjust to the level of service needed by private developers.
Park Engineering, Inc. has provided construction management and inspections specifically for development projects for both residential and commercial projects since 2021. Staff have worked collaboratively with the assigned inspector to streamline inspection services for various projects. Park Engineering, Inc. is committed to the City to provide the resources needed to ensure that the development projects are constructed to the satisfaction of the City.
On September 28, 2021, an agreement was executed between the City of Oakley and Park Engineering, Inc. for on-call consulting services related to Inspection Support Services. The contract was limited to a not-to-exceed amount of $200,00 per fiscal year. Peer reviews of improvement plan design for private development projects have continued to increase, such as improvements within the East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan area. Staff have needed to increase the amount of work being performed by consultants for inspection services to meet development project timelines. As a Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
308
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US result, staff are requesting an increase of $50,000 in the contract amount for FY 2023/24, for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $250,000.
In addition, Park Engineering, Inc. has provided their statement of qualifications and continues to be the preferred consultant to help assist staff for FY 2024/25 and FY 2025/26 with the option to extend the contract for an additional two years to 2028 if work is performed satisfactorily. This contract would be for a not-to-exceed amount of $250,000 per Fiscal Year. The award of the Agreement is exempt from competitive bidding under Section 3.6.010 of the Oakley Municipal Code paragraph 1) which provides an exception for competitive bidding on “Contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services, such as, but not limited to, services rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers, and other specialized consultants”.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan for community health and safety by ensuring engineering review of various projects are maintained to preserve safety for all. Contracting engineering services also maintains a sustainable organization from the demand of varying schedules of multiple projects.
Fiscal Impact
Approval of the resolution will increase the not-to-exceed contract amount by $50,000 for FY 2023/24 for a total amount of $250,000. Approval of the resolution will also authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Park Engineering, Inc. with a not -to-exceed amount of $250,000 per fiscal year through June 30, 2026, with the option to extend the agreement until 2028 if work is performed satisfactorily. Private Development projects will fully fund the engineering support services cost on an as needed basis. This contract will not require funding from the City’s General Fund.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the On-Call services agreement with Park Engineering, Inc. for FY 2023/24 and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Staff is also recommending that the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Park Engineering, Inc. for private development engineering support services for a not-to-exceed amount of $250,000 per fiscal year through June 30, 2026, with the option of extending the agreement through June 30, 2028.
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Amendment Agreement No.1 for FY 2023/24
3. Park Engineering, Inc. Proposal for Contract FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 309
Resolution No. __-24 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
APPROVING CONTRACT AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE AGREEMENT
WITH PARK ENGINEERING, INC. FOR ON-CALL ENGINEERING SUPPORT
SERVICES RELATED TO PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH PARK ENGINEERING, INC. FOR ON-CALL PRIVATE
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024/25 AND 2025/26 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THESE AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2021, the City executed an agreement with Park Engineering, Inc. for Inspection Support Services related to private development projects with a not to exceed amount of $200,000 per fiscal year; and WHEREAS, after review of the expenditures to date for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 and projecting costs for these services for the remaining months of the fiscal year with the various private development projects slated to start construction; staff has determined that the original not to exceed amount of $200,000 is not sufficient to cover the necessary support services for these projects; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting an additional $50,000 be added to FY 2023/24 budget, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $250,000; and WHEREAS, the City of Oakley utilizes the services of consultants to provide support services on a wide range of projects where the scope and magnitude for many of the tasks are larger than what City staff can perform; and WHEREAS, Park Engineering, Inc. has performed private development inspection support services for municipalities in the Bay Area in an exemplary way and can accommodate the City’s service needs. Park Engineering, Inc. has provided professional inspection services to the City of Oakley since September 2021; and WHEREAS, the award of the agreement is exempt from competitive bidding under Section 3.6.010 of the Oakley Municipal Code paragraph 1) which provides an exception for competitive bidding on “Contracts involving the acquisition of professional or specialized services, such as, but not limited to, services rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers, and other specialized consultants”.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley that Contract Amendment Number 1 with Park Engineering, Inc. is hereby approved for a not-to-exceed amount of $250,000 for FY 2023/24. A copy of the Contract Amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit A., and the OnCall Development Engineering Support Services proposal attached hereto as Exhibit B with Park Engineering, Inc. for an amount not-to-exceed amount of 310
Resolution No. __-24 Page 2
$250,000.00 per fiscal year for FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 is hereby approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute these agreements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED, if at the end of the term, the services have been performed satisfactorily, the City Manager has the discretion to approve an extension of the On-Call Services agreement to June 30, 2028, under the same terms as the original agreement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on March 12, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
ATTEST: Anissa Williams, Mayor
______
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
311
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OAKLEY AND PARK ENGINEERING, INC. FOR ON-CALL SERVICES RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PRJOJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 This Amendment is entered into by and between the CITY OF OAKLEY, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”), and Park Engineering, Inc., a California Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Contractor”), effective as of the 12TH day of March 2024.
RECITALS
A. On September 28, 2021, City and Consultant executed an Agreement for on-call consulting services related to private development project Inspection Support Services (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) in the amount of $200,000 per fiscal year; and, B. City and Consultant now desire that the following amendment be made to the Consultant services for FY 2023/2024: increase of $50,000 to the not-to-exceed contract amount from $200,000 per fiscal year to $250,000 for Fiscal Year 2023/24 to hereby be approved by the City Manager; and,
C. Except as provided herein, all other terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Oakley, a municipal corporation in the State of California, has authorized the execution of this Amendment in duplicate by its City Manager, Approved to as Form by the City Attorney and attested by its City Clerk as of the 12th day of March 2024, and the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed in duplicate.
City
City of Oakley, a municipal corporation
By:
Joshua McMurray, City Manager
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________________
Derek P. Cole, City Attorney
Consultant
Park Engineering, Inc., a California Corporation
By:
Jaemin Park, President
312
Orinda Office
372 Village Square
Orinda, CA 94563
Tel: 925-257-2508
Fax: 925-401-7030
Emeryville Office
3960 Adeline Street, #3
Emeryville, CA 94608
Tel: 925-257-2508
Fax: 925-401-7030
March 4, 2024
Mr. Kevin Rohani, PE
Public Works Director/ City Engineer
Public Works Department
City of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
RE: Proposal to Provide City of Oakley As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection Services for Private Development Projects Dear Kevin:
Park Engineering, Inc. is very pleased to provide this proposal for As-Needed Construction Management and Inspection Services to the City of Oakley to oversee Private Development construction projects.
As discussed, we will provide construction management and inspector specifically for development projects, continuing with services that we have been performing for that past three years. We are committed to the City to provide the resources needed to ensure that the development projects are constructed to the satisfaction of the City.
James Beauchamp will be our primary Construction Manager for this project.
James has been involved with the development for this contract and will continue reporting to you to complete the requested work.
As principal in charge, I will be responsible of any contractual issues and supporting the City and the project team where needed.
We are very excited to be working the City. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. I can be reached anytime on my mobile number at (925) 818-3756 or by E-mail at jpark@parkeng.com.
Sincerely,
Jaemin Park, PE
President
313
SCOPE OF WORK
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
Park Engineering will perform all the duties required the City needs to ensure that the development construction work meets the City’s standards and those of regulatory agencies. We will be reporting to the City and representing the City on the project and to the public. Some of the tasks that we will be performing include but are not limited to:
CONSTRUCTION PHASE
• Represent the City as the single point of contact for all communications and coordination between the developer, utility companies, regulatory agencies, local businesses and residents, and the testing firm.
• Report to the City’s Project Manager, including sharing all correspondence, to ensure that the City is kept up to date on all project matters.
• Manage submittals from the contractor and review for compliance with City requirements.
• Coordinate, manage and respond to Requests for Information (RFI’s) submitted by the contractor where City response is needed. Keep track of any responses between contractor and designer to ensure that the City is kept up to date on any issues or changes.
• Coordinate and conduct meetings with the contractor, designer and oversight agencies for RFI’s, when appropriate to resolve and clarify complex issues. • Schedule necessary quality assurance sampling and testing of materials for the project to ensure quality of materials meets the City standards.
• Answer questions from the public concerning the project work and schedule. • Our resident engineers and construction inspectors will be available to answer questions on an ongoing basis. They will report the current status of the project’s schedule to the City on a daily, weekly and monthly basis, as needed or requested. • Support all project work with documentation to meet the contract requirements for acceptance.
• Review contractor’s planned schedule for conformance with the specifications and for reasonableness of the sequence and duration of the activities. • Review work progress as compared to the planned schedule and notify contractor and City Project Manager of schedule slippage.
• Identify actual and potential problems associated with the construction project and recommend sound engineering solutions.
• Inspect the construction elements of the project as required by the construction contract plans and specifications.
ü Perform all field inspection activities to monitor compliance with the contract plans and specifications. Record all items of work, materials incorporated, materials tested, and any other pertinent information in a daily diary for permanent record of events. ü Project photographs and video documentation of project progress and major work components will be done on a weekly basis and kept for permanent records to support disputes and verify quality for acceptance.
ü Schedule necessary quality assurance sampling and testing of materials for the project to verify compliance with the specifications.
314
SCOPE OF WORK
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
ü Arrange for specialty inspection, such as welding inspection or source inspection of materials when needed to verify compliance with the contract. • Make arrangements to perform necessary quality assurance sampling and testing when needed.
• Analyze records of materials used in the project in accordance with ASTM and California Standard Test Methods.
• Review test data and materials certifications submitted by the contractor and suppliers for compliance with the contract requirements.
POST-CONSTRUCTION PHASE
• Conduct, review, and follow up on inspection work to assure completion of the contract including any punch list items of work.
• Inspect work as it is completed. Develop and issue punch list for any needed corrections as the work progresses.
• Perform final inspection of all work for acceptance.
• Review as-built drawings, report of completion and all required documents for project close-out for the City.
• Prepare and transition official construction records, record drawing and project files to the City.
315
LEVEL OF EFFORT – COST PROPOSAL
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
LEVEL OF EFFORT
Based on the information that we have gathered to date; the construction management team will start with one construction manager/resident engineer with support from two construction inspectors. Staffing levels will be adjusted to match the workload and the City’s requests. Below is a range of standard billing rates for the specific staff level.
SCHEDULE OF STANDARD BILLING RATES
Construction Manager/ Inspector $152.98 Per hour effective July 1, 2024 *3% escalation per calendar year in January 1.
316
PROJECT STAFFING
PROJECT TEAM
James Beauchamp, EIT, Construction Manager/Sr. Construction Inspector James has spent over 25 years in construction management and worked on major development projects including Dougherty Velley Development. James was involved with the parks, and schools at Dougherty in addition to the bridges, utilities, mass grading and roads. James has also worked on levees, creeks, trails and many other types of projects throughout the Bay Area. 317
Regular
Rate
Overtime
Rate
James Beauchamp, EIT
CM/ Sr. Const. Inspector $ 152.98 $ 229.47 1000 0 $ 152,980.00 $ 152,980.00
Regular
Rate
Overtime
Rate
James Beauchamp, EIT
CM/ Sr. Const. Inspector $ 157.97 $ 236.96 1000 0 $ 157,970.00 $ 157,970.00
$ 310,950.00
NOTE: 3% RATE INCREASE ON JANUARY 1ST
Regular
Rate
Overtime
Rate
James Beauchamp, EIT
CM/ Sr. Const. Inspector $ 157.97 $ 236.96 1000 0 $ 157,970.00 $ 157,970.00
Regular
Rate
Overtime
Rate
James Beauchamp, EIT
CM/ Sr. Const. Inspector $ 162.71 $ 244.07 1000 0 $ 162,710.00 $ 162,710.00
$ 320,680.00
NOTE: 3% RATE INCREASE ON JANUARY 1ST
City of Oakley
Various Development Projects
Cost Estimate for Construction Management/Inspection Services Fiscal Year 2024-2025: July 1 - December 31 (Full Time 8 Hours per Day) Name/Classification
Rates
Total Regular
Hours
Total
Overtime
Hours
Cost
Subtotal (July 1 - December 31) =
Fiscal Year 2024-2025: January 1 - June 30 (Full Time 8 Hours per Day) Name/Classification
Rates
Total Regular
Hours
Total
Overtime
Hours
Cost
Subtotal (January 1 - June 30) =
Fiscal Year 2025-2026: July 1 - December 31 (Full Time 8 Hours per Day) Name/Classification
Rates
Total Regular
Hours
Total
Overtime
Hours
Cost
Subtotal (January 1 - June 30) =
TOTAL (Fiscal Year 2024-2025) =
TOTAL (Fiscal Year 2025-2026) =
Subtotal (July 1 - December 31) =
Fiscal Year 2025-2026: January 1 - June 30 (Full Time 8 Hours per Day) Name/Classification
Rates
Total Regular
Hours
Total
Overtime
Hours
Cost
318
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
JAMES BEAUCHAMP, EIT
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER/ASSISTANT RESIDENT ENGINEER/CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR Years of Experience
25 Education
B.S. Civil Engineering, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, 1999
Certifications and Training
Engineer in Training (EIT) #646, Jan-2006 40-Hour HazMat Certified Class 1 Operator – Water Treatment Class 2 Operator – Water Distribution Confined Space Certified
Key Qualifications
James Beauchamp has spent over 25 years in the construction industry working as a construction inspector for Caltrans and other public and transit agencies on public works and highway construction projects. He is proficient in the execution of construction contracts, as well as construction inspection at the city, state and federal levels. His experience includes oversight for projects that include concrete bridges, pipeline, water and sewer, water treatment, roadway and freeway AC installation, pile driving, new and existing city intersection and streetscape construction/rehabilitation, and utilities. James believes in giving his best to his work, and works diligently to complete projects successfully, on time and within budget. He can work independently with the contractor and as a member of a team to get the project to a successful completion.
Project Experience
• Various Development and Capital Projects 2021-2024, City of Oakley James served as the Construction Inspector for multiple development, capital improvement and permit inspection projects. Projects included new housing developments; new City infrastructure – streets, curb/gutter/sidewalk, underground utilities, signalized intersections and street lighting; new commercial developments including new City infrastructure; and capital improvements projects including roadways, drainage systems, and signals & lighting. • Buchanan Field Airport Runway 14L-32R Rehabilitation Project, Contra Costa County James served as the Construction Manager/Construction Observer for this $5.5M FAA funded airport runway rehabilitation project. The work consists of rehabilitating asphalt concrete pavement, full width, on Runway 14L-32R, with the exception of the Runway 1L-19R intersection. Work included Cold milling, Crack repair, Full depth asphalt and PCC pavement removal, Earthwork/Grading, Asphalt surface course, P-401, Application of asphalt surface treatment, P-608, Runway grooving, Application of new pavement markings, P-620, Taxiway lighting and signage modifications. Additional work consisted of the removal and replacement of the Runway 14L-32R Medium Intensity Runway Lighting System including new conduit, base cans, pull boxes, cable, and LED fixtures, modifications to existing runway exit and distance remaining signs and a new constant current regulator, Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) joint, crack, and spall repairs and replacement of the pavement markings within the PCC runway ends on Runway 14L-32R and 1L-19R.
• San Rafael Street Resurfacing 2018-2019, City of San Rafael, CA - $2.8M James is the Construction Inspector on this project that includes installation of hot mix asphalt and/or micro-surfacing treatments at various locations throughout the City. This project also includes installation of ADA compliant curb ramps, curb, gutter, and sidewalk. • Measure Q Pavement Repair Project 8, City of Concord, CA - $1.3M James was the Construction Inspector on this locally funded street improvement project that resurfaced multiple local roads, along with installation of replacement pavement delineation. Work also included new concrete curb & gutter, ADA compliant curb ramps and cross stree valley gutters. 319
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
James worked closely with the City and construction contractor to keep the public informed of the upcoming work to minimize No Parking impacts.
• 2017 Storm Damage Slide Repair Projects, City of San Rafael, CA - $1.8M (combined) James was the Construction Inspector on three simultaneous slide repair projects, resulting from the heavy rains of the 2016/17 winter months. These FEMA funded slide repair projects include the installation of soil nail/tie-back retaining walls and regrading of adjacent slopes at three private property locations. Work also includes drainage improvements, slope stabilization and roadway restoration above and/or below the slide areas. James is working closely with City staff on this high public interest projects, especially the residents directly impacted by the slides. • Chilco Street Utility Undergrounding, City of Menlo Park, CA – private development (Facebook) James was the Construction Inspector for the City on the developer permit project that replaced existing storm drain, domestic water system, reclaimed water systems and sewer related to the Facebook Campus development. James was the full-time inspector to ensure contract compliance by the developer’s contractor building the facilities that the City took over upon completion. • 2017 Annual and Measure J & L Paving Rehabilitation Project, City of Orinda, CA - $10M James was the Assistant Resident Engineer/Construction Inspector on this citywide pavement rehabilation proejct. The project work consisted of improvements occurring on 65 different streets within the City. Roadway rehabilitation was primarily through Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) with an HMA overlay, extensive drainage and concrete curb & gutter replacement work. Other work consisted of utility adjustments, replacement of HMA dikes & swales and roadway delineation. The project was locally funded with the use of both City funds and Contra Costa County Measure funds. • Moraga Road Utility Undergrounding, Sidewalks & Pavement Resurfacing Projects, Town of Moraga, CA - $2.7M
James was the Assistant Resident Engineer/Construction Inspector on these three projects for the Town of Moraga that were construction simultaneously.
ü Utility Undergrounding, $1.7M
A Rule 20A project with PG&E for the Town to convert existing overhead utilities to new underground facilities along one of the main roadways for the Town. Work consisted of extensive daily traffic control for vehicles and pedestrians to perform the installation of new joint trench and utility vault systems. Work performed not only for PG&E, but also AT&T and Comcast relocation to underground facilities. Close coordination with utility crews was also necessary for each utility performing their conversion work to underground, while maintaining service to the existing residents along Moraga Road. The project also required coordination with other Town construction projects along Moraga Road and for projects utilizing Moraga Road as their project’s detour.
ü Bicycle & Pedestrian Improvements, $160k
A federally funded project to construct about 300 LF of sidewalk to connect two critical side streets along Moraga Road. Project required reconstruction of residential driveways, coordination with the local post office and the Town’s concurrent Utility Undergrounding Project. ü Resurfacing Project, $800k
A federally funded project that will remove and replace the top 3-inches of existing Moraga Road from St. Mary’s Road to Draeger Road. With the majority of the project consisting of only a 2-lane road, daily one-way traffic control will be required to complete the contract work on one of the Town’s busiest roadways. Advance notice and monitoring of traffic control will be critical to the community outreach on the project. Concrete curb ramps, base failure repairs, slurry seal and final pavement delineation will also be a part of the contract work. This project is anticipated to start in early spring of 2017.
320
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
• California Avenue Streetscape Project, City of Palo Alto, CA - $6.9M James was the Assistant Resident Engineer/Construction Inspector on this streetscape and street improvement project, which included the widening of sidewalks, creation of two new plazas near Park Avenue and Birch Street, a new fountain near the Caltrain station, new street furniture, new streetlights and landscape elements and a reduction of lanes from four to two. The work also involved the replacement of an of an old water main under California Avenue. • San Francisco International Airport Runway Safety Area Program, San Francisco, CA - $223M James was the Assistant Resident Engineer/Construction Inspector on this federally mandated runway safety area program at San Francisco International Airport constructed in two phases, that involved the lengthening of runways, installing Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS) and installing new runway lights. The project works included demolition, excavation, grading, PCC and HMA paving, electrical and lighting and installing engineered material arresting system. Coordination with operations and traffic control tower to ensure that all work is completed without disrupting airport operations. Because SFO is essentially landlocked, construction options were limited. The airport’s four intersecting runways are sandwiched between the San Francisco Bay on the right and Highway 101 on the left. Extensions sufficed for the airport’s two longest runways, known as the 10-28s. But improving its North-South runways, 1R-19L and 1L-19R, involved installing an Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS) from Zodiac Aerospace on both ends of both runways. Each is a bed of crushable concrete material similar to those used for runaway truck ramps on highways. James provided day to day inspection of contractor’s work, documenting all work in daily reports including photos, measuring and verifying quantities, scheduling materials testing, and coordinating with airport operations. He also supported responses to RFI’s, Contra Change Orders, submittals, and project schedules.
• Oakland International Airport Taxiway Project, CA - $25M James was the Assistant Resident Engineer/Construction Inspector on this taxiway improvement project at Oakland International Airport. The project was part of the Port’s preparatory work for the federally mandated Runway Safety Area Program. Project work included demolition, excavation, grading, and PCC and HMA paving. Coordination with airport operations, and adjacent contractors for the BART Oakland Airport Connector Project was required. James provided day to day inspection of contractor operations, preparing daily reports, scheduling materials testing, project documentation and filing, correspondence, responding to RFI’s and CCO requests, and providing oversite to BART contractors representing the Port.
• VTA Freight Rail Relocation, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, San Jose, CA - $35M James was the Assistant Resident Engineer/ Construction Inspector on this project to relocate Union Pacific freight rail lines in the Cities of Fremont and Milpitas. This project consists of relocating freight rail tracks to clear UPRR right of way purchased by the VTA. This work includes the relocation of Kinder Morgan and Chevron petroleum pipelines by means of horizontal directional drilling under existing roadways and creeks. The bores are up to 6000 lineal feet in length and up to 130 feet in depth. This contract also includes the relocation of fiber optic lines for MCI, Verizon, Sprint, AT&T, Quest, and Level 3 by means of horizontal directional drilling and installation of joint trenches. It also includes $30M of improvements, including the construction of box culverts at four creeks, demolition of two existing railroad bridges, seismic retrofit of the Able Street Bridge, modification to existing grade crossings at Kato and Dixon Landing roads, construction of new embankment and trackway for new freight rail tracks. This project also requires close permit coordination with the City of Fremont, City of Milpitas, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Department of Fish and Game, Army Corp of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board.
• Roadway Realignment, Town of Tiburon, CA
321
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
James was Resident Engineer for roadway and median realignment of Tiburon Boulevard. His duties included management of the contract according to the State of California Standard Specifications; including Caltrans ROW permitting, design plan review, tracking of quantities, progress payments and change order review.
• On-Call Construction Management and Inspection (Dougherty Valley Development), Contra Costa County, San Ramon, CA,
James was Resident Engineer for County Public Works on a variety of projects ranging in construction cost between $100,000 and $20,000,000. These were federally funded projects and developer funded projects and consisted of County oversight and inspection of brand new city roadways, traffic signal installations, various types of box culvert construction, concrete box girder bridge construction, parks, schools, storm drain and new utility installations. Some specialty projects included the construction new schools (K-12), high school artificial turf soccer field, and parks. Responsibilities also included overseeing day to day construction activities, supervising both County and consultant inspectors, and coordination with developers, utility companies, local City representatives, and closeout acceptance with the Town of San Ramon and Contra Costa County.
ü North Dougherty Road Bridge, Contra Costa County, CA
James served as the Resident Engineer for a CIP 310’L X 129.5’W box girder bridge supported by, 5 – 72” columns cast on 78”X 140’ CIDH Piles, and abutments. James’ duties included coordinating with all parties, including the Town of San Ramon Public Works, the developer, the contractor, County engineering, Fish and Game, and other creek protection and utility agencies. Duties also included providing direct supervision over County and consultant inspectors, inspecting the project according to plans, incorporating the State of California Standard Plans and Specifications dated July 2002 and special provisions, determining/verifying grades utilizing 4-scale drawings, observing fully-cased CIDH excavating operation (oscillator/excavating crane method), observing reinforcing steel (verifying size, grade, spacing and clearance), observing concrete placement, and sampling / casting compressive strength test specimens according to Caltrans testing methods 539/540, as well as pile driving operations at the abutments and verifying blow counts, and observing erection of falsework and earthwork (including grading of creek and rock slope protection installation) and SWPPP management.
ü South Dougherty Road Bridge, Contra Costa County, CA
James served as the Resident Engineer for this CIP 295’L X 123’W box girder bridge supported by, 8 – 60” columns cast on 66”X 110’ CIDH Piles, and abutments. James’ duties included coordinating with all parties, including the Town of San Ramon Public Works, the developer, the contractor, County engineering, Fish & Game, and other creek protection and utility agencies. Duties also included providing direct supervision over County and consultant inspectors, inspecting the project according to plans, incorporating the State of California Standard Plans and Specifications dated July 2002 and special provisions, determining/verifying grades utilizing 4-scale drawings, observing fully cased CIDH excavating operation (oscillator/excavating crane method), observing reinforcing steel (verifying size, grade, spacing and clearance), observing concrete placement, and sampling / casting compressive strength test specimens according to Caltrans testing methods 539/540, as well as pile driving operations at the abutments and verifying blow counts, and observing erection of false work and earthwork (including grading of creek and rock slope protection installation) and SWPPP management.
• South Trunk Sewer Line: Forensic Exploration and Rehabilitation, City of Dixon Public Works, Dixon, CA – $2 M
322
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
James was the construction inspector for the City of Dixon’s project to excavate and evaluate the reasons their 3- year- old, 1 million dollar 42” VCP sewer main was never used. The main was found to have an influx of ground water 10 times over acceptable rates. James was responsible for overseeing the replacement construction of all (30 each at approximately 20’ deep) manholes, which were cast in place bases with 60”/84” to 36” pre-cast, T-lock lined segment towers, as well as localized segment linings and pressurized joint grouting. Work was conducted throughout the winter, thereby requiring a massive dewatering effort and SWPPP management. Included in the project was the coordination of all third party individuals (involved with the original construction) interested in observing the excavation, forensics and testing of the original system. James was requested to give a deposition on the forensic results determined from the excavation and removal of the existing system and he participated in the resulting court proceedings as an expert witness for the City of Dixon. Major efforts were conducted to project endangered species on or adjacent to this project. • Fairmont Ave Construction and Rehabilitation, City of El Cerrito Public Works, CA - $2 M James was the primary construction inspector for the rehabilitation and beautification of 6 blocks of Fairmont Avenue from San Pablo Avenue to Coronado Street. This project included the realignment of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, lane modifications, new street lighting, new signal installation and irrigation. Fairmont Avenue is an urban artery in the downtown area of the city and one of James’ daily focus points was moving traffic through and around the construction areas with little disruption.
His inspection services entailed verifying all street cuts, demolitions, and excavations, installations of the underground systems and inlets, and all materials used in this project. This was a highly visible project, with intense vehicle and pedestrian control, including a local school for the blind, active local businesses, a shopping mall and a BART station that all had to work smoothly during construction. • Manganese Water Treatment Facility Construction, City of Lathrop Public Works, CA - $2.8 M This project involved the construction of a Well #21 Manganese Water Treatment Facility for the City of Lathrop. It was one of three new facilities being constructed to accommodate the massive area population growth. This site consisted of a double Manganese Tank – water filtration system, external back flush tank and pond with a main Control Building. James was responsible for the implementation of all design standards during construction, negotiations with the contractor and the city, as well all material testing, construction, system flushing and final water quality testing. He was also responsible for SWPPP management and water quality testing.
• Mokelumne No.3 Aqueduct Seismic Upgrades, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), Holt, CA - $30 M
James was a construction inspector for the Seismic upgrading on the No. 3 - 10 ft. diameter, aboveground Mokelumne pipeline, which was the largest of three pipelines that transported water from the Pardee Dam across the San Francisco Bay Delta wetlands. James performed field inspections and negotiated pile acceptance for the 60’x 12” steel ‘H’ pile driving operations to reinforce the existing pile caps, the construction review of the expanding pile caps, as well field support for the installation of new seismic cross bracing and dampener systems. He was also responsible for SWPPP management. Major efforts were conducted to project endangered species on or adjacent to this project.
• I-880 at U.S. 101 Widening Project, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), Santa Clara, CA James was the construction inspector responsible for segments of the final paving on the Highway 880 widening project. He was responsible for inspecting and documenting the construction of the newly aligned on and off ramps, AC mainline freeway paving of additional new lanes and final overlays of the entire freeway sections. Highway 880 was closed in one direction or completely during the work that was performed at night. James reported directly to Caltrans during this time. Safety was a vital issue with the freeway closures as well as construction alongside active traffic. 323
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
• U.S. 101 / Bailey Ave Interchange Improvements, VTA, San Jose, CA - $23.6 M James assisted the Resident Engineer in the administration of this project, which involved the construction of a new freeway interchange to connect Bailey Avenue with Route 101 in the city of San Jose and County of Santa Clara. It included entrance and exit ramps, an over-crossing structure and a bridge over Coyote Creek. He performed field inspection, checked the contractor’s work for compliance with the plans and specifications, documented contractor activity in daily reports and prepared calculations and documentation of pay quantities for work performed by contractors.
Coordination with various regulatory agencies was also necessary for the work involving the Coyote Creek. He was also responsible for SWPPP management. Major efforts were conducted to project endangered species on or adjacent to this project.
• Bay Meadows Mix-Use Facility Construction, City of San Mateo Public Works- $28 M James was the construction inspector for the developer- built, Bay Meadows Mixed–Use Facility as well as various other public works construction projects throughout the City of San Mateo. Reporting directly to the City’s construction manager, James provided inspection, project documentation and reporting for city encroachment permit work, street resurfacing, sewer main installation, city roadways and intersection realignment, traffic signal installations, relocation of underground utilities, and permit inspection.
• Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Fiber Optic System and Cell Tower Network, $30K to $4.5M James was a construction inspector and civil engineer for BART Telecom Revenue Division.
He helped design cable structure above ground and through tunnel sections, which included multiple access points for 3rd party customers at city train stations and along the ROW. The engineering and designs were tricky because the cable systems needed to weave through an electrified (64K Volts) train system that was designed to run people and trains only. This was a new fiber system that had to find a continuously protected path through the maze of existing utilities, 70 mph trains and the flow of pedestrians. James helped manage the sub-contracting crews and contracts, inspected the construction of track line fiber-optic artery systems and cell towers within the BART ROW. • Field Superintendent, MFSNT Communications, Adesta, CA Mr. Beauchamp supervised a crew of field engineers overseeing construction crews, with regard to the design engineering; city, state and federal permitting; traffic control; construction and closeout of an 8-duct fiber-optic system through 17 Bay Area cities, stretching from San Francisco to San Jose. • Contracts Manager, MFSNT Communications, Adesta, CA
James oversaw most aspects of the project finances, schedule and monthly progress payments of subcontractors and suppliers. Work consisted of constructing fiber-optic network loops all around the San Francisco Bay Area. James was also responsible for reporting finances and work progress directly to the owners such as: MCI, WorldCom, Level 3, Williams, BART, Sprint, and AT&T. • Field Engineer, Caltrans District 5, Monterey, CA
James monitored and inspected the seismic retrofit of three 1930’s concrete arch bridges along Highway 1. He also participated in the emergency erosion control of landslides south of Lake Tahoe, California. James was responsible for all aspects of the project including contract administration, coordinating construction staking and materials testing, coordinating with utility companies and other agencies. He was responsible for document control, coordinating with various agencies, coordinating construction inspection, and providing as needed construction inspection. • Field Superintendent, Metropolitan Fiber Systems. Peter Kiewit Telecom Division 324
PROJECT STAFFING
City of Oakley
Construction Management and Inspection Services
James, with a small team of field engineers, engineered and surveyed a 1,000-mile fiber-optic system route for the Alyeska Pipeline Company during his pursuit of his Civil Engineering degree. He supervised multiple crews of sub-contractors for the construction of the 200-mile Southern leg of the system. Work in the Alaskan outback was arduous and included river boring, trenching, plowing, rock cutting, and cliff rock mounting of fiber optic conduits, State and Federal permitting, private and public relations, bartering of property rights, field reporting; quantities, T&M, production, accidents.
James was the sole field contact and personally responsible within his sector for all construction, accidents, environmental restrictions and safety while along the pipeline. 325
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Awarding a Construction Contract to R&R Pacific Construction Inc. for the construction of Fiscal Year 2023/24 Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair and Replacement Project, Capital Improvement Project Number 295
Background and Analysis
The City’s adopted Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget designates funding for various infrastructure repair and replacement projects. This is consistent with the City of Oakley’s Strategic Plan to improve the quality of the City’s public infrastructure and to enhance the quality of life for our residents.
CIP No. 295 includes the repair and replacement of damaged and uplifted sidewalks or curb and gutter throughout the City of Oakley. The project is done annually to eliminate trip and fall hazards, and to provide safe streets and sidewalks for pedestrians in the community. Tree roots are a major cause of sidewalk uplifts, and this project is targeting some of the worst areas in the City where tree roots have damaged the concrete beyond any temporary repair.
Additionally, this project will work in coordination with the adopted 50-50 Concrete Repair Cost Share Program that helps the property owners in dealing with concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk related problems, such as uplifts from tree root overgrowth. The 50-50 Concrete Repair Cost Share Program provides the City assistance in managing the repair and replacement contract, as well as sharing the cost with the property owners. This project will help in providing safe pedestrian facilities and reduce liability and claims for trip and fall accidents.
On March 5, 2024, ten (10) total bids were received for this project. Staff reviewed the bids and determined that R&R Pacific Construction, Inc. was the lowest responsible bidder for the project at a cost of $99,031.00.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goals.
Fiscal Impact
The FY 2023/24 CIP budget has allocated funding from the RMRA fund for this project, which will fully fund the project construction.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
326
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving a construction agreement with R&R Pacific Construction, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $99,031.00, and to authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement.
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Bid Summary
327
Resolution No. XX-24 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. XX-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH R&R PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 CURB, GUTTER, & SIDEWALK REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROJECT – CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NUMBER 295
WHEREAS, City Staff prepared the plans, specifications, and estimates for the construction of Capital Improvement Project (CIP) No. 295 - Curb, Gutter, & Sidewalk Repair and Replacement Project which includes curb, gutter, sidewalk repairs, grinding, and other related work; and
WHEREAS, the plans, specifications and special provisions were publicly advertised for bidding, with the bid period closing at 2:00 P.M. on Tuesday, March 5, 2024; and WHEREAS, ten (10) bids were received prior to the close of the bidding process; and WHEREAS, R&R Pacific Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid for a total cost of $99,031.00 for the work; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the Agreement with R&R Pacific Construction, Inc. for the construction of the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Curb, Gutter, & Sidewalk Repair and Replacement Project - CIP 295, for an amount not to exceed $99,031.00 is approved, and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute said Agreement. The bid results are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on the 12th of March 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
___________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
328
329
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Jeri Tejeda, Administrative Services Director
Troy Faulk, Recreation Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of the Special Event Beverage Concessions Non-Profit Selection and Vendor Selection Criteria
Background and Analysis
Each year the Recreation Division hosts special events throughout the year that are designed to bring residents and visitors to Oakley and activate our downtown area.
Those events include Concerts in the Park in partnership with Foodie Crew on June 7th, August 2nd, September 6th, and October 4th, 25th Anniversary Birthday Party on May 4th, Summerfest on June 29th, Heart of Oakley on September 21st, and Oaktoberfest on October 26th.
On January 18, 2024, a Request for Proposal for Beer and Wine Concessions was released for non-profit organizations to submit their proposals. The proposal was advertised on social media including Facebook and Instagram as well as included in the Oakley eNews. All non-profits who had previously submitted a proposal in 2023 were also contacted via email. The deadline for nonprofit organizations to submit their proposals was February 14, 2024. Staff received five proposals from organizations including:
Adventure Therapy Foundation
Be Exceptional
East County All Star Fundraising
Pillars of Hope
Rotary Club of Oakley
The applicants who were selected will be required to submit a report following the event they are selected for, and those reports will be presented to the City Council in January of 2025.
Additionally, vendors and non-profit groups are selected to table at various City events including Juneteenth, Summerfest, Heart of Oakley and Oaktoberfest. The Recreation Staff has reviewed the selection process used to select vendors and nonprofits to participate in these City events with the goal of creating a more fair and transparent system for choosing these groups. This was a new concept that was Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
330
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us presented last year, and staff found a few areas in which we could improve the process.
Consistency with Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
The Oakley Strategic Plan 27+ highlights that community and collaborative partnerships are a primary goal. Partnering with non-government organizations, the RFP provided the City of Oakley the opportunity to foster and maintain strong relationships with these types of groups and to assist them in their community efforts. Additionally, the Strategic Plan 27+ goal of providing our residents, businesses, and visitors with an opportunity to recreate and relax which is also reflected in the goals of the events offered.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact associated with the selection of the non-profit organizations.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends dividing the events in order to offer all non-profit organizations that submitted an RFP an opportunity to fundraise for their organization.
Staff reviewed the submissions and assessed them in three categories:
Demonstration of experience selling beer/wine at large scale events, demonstration of the staff/volunteer capacity, and demonstration of alignment with Strategic Plan 27+. Staff also considered how each proposal best aligned to the various events.
Based on the assessment staff recommends the assignment of organizations to the events below:
25th Anniversary Birthday Party: Rotary Club of Oakley
June Concert: Be Exceptional
Summerfest: Rotary Club of Oakley
August Concert: Pillars of Hope
September Concert/Who Wants to be a Millionaire Event: Be Exceptional October Concert: Pillars of Hope
Heart of Oakley: East County All Stars
Oaktoberfest: Adventure Therapy
331
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 3
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Staff also recommends updating our selection process for tabling at City Events, removing subjective criteria and replacing it with measurable standards. The recommended selection tool is attached for review.
Attachments
1. Events Beverage Concession Request for Proposal
2. Adventure Therapy Foundation Proposal
3. Be Exceptional Proposal
4. East County All Star Fundraising Proposal
5. Pillars of Hope Proposal
6. Rotary Club of Oakley Proposal
7. Internal Selection Criteria - Vendors
332
-1-
SECTION I
GENERAL INFORMATION
Introduction
The City of Oakley (City) is soliciting proposals from qualified non-profit organizations to operate an alcoholic event beverage concession at the 25th Anniversary Birthday Party, Oakley Summer Fest, Heart of Oakley Festival, Oaktober Festival and Concerts in the Park, using a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Daily Beer and Wine license (only beer and wine may be sold), which is to be secured by the Concessionaire, in the Concessionaire's name.
Background
The 25th Anniversary Birthday Party is a new event this year to commemorate our City’s incorporation in 1999. The event will feature live music, food trucks, activities, raffles, and the screening of a movie from 1999. This event is scheduled for May 4, 2024.
The City of Oakley introduced the Oakley Summer Fest in 2022. This annual event is scheduled for Saturday, June 29, 2024 and will include a parade to kick off the day followed by the larger event from 11am-5pm on Main Street between Norcross Lane and Vintage Parkway that includes live entertainment, food and craft vendors, beer and wine, a children’s area, cornhole and more. 7,000 attendees participate annually.
The City of Oakley began hosting the Heart of Oakley Festival in 2013 and the event has continued to grow since. The last event was held in September 2023 with an estimated attendance of over 5,000. The event includes approximately 50 retail and informational vendors, food vendors, performances, kid’s activities and beer and wine sales. The 2024 Heart of Oakley Festival is scheduled for Saturday, September 21
st on Main Street between Vintage Parkway and Norcross Lane.
The 2024 Oaktober Festival is scheduled for October 26
th, at Oakley Civic Center Plaza. This event
includes a fun fall theme schedule of events including a pie walk, pumpkin decorating, costume parade, food and craft vendors and more. Typical attendance at this event is around 1,500.
The Oakley Concerts in the Park event series consists of live bands playing from the stage in Civic Center Plaza. This event is run in conjunction with the Foodie Crew’s Friday Night Bites program providing food trucks for these events. The 2024 events will take place on the following Fridays from 5pm-9pm: June 7th, August 2nd, September 6th, and October 4th. 1,500 people typically attend each event.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Event Beverage Concessions Services 2024
333
-2-
For Heart of Oakley the Non-Profit would be expected to provide a minimum of 5 craft beers and two wines in order to provide attendees with a beer garden experience. The beer and wine selection must be agreed upon with Recreation staff a minimum of two weeks before the event.
The City will provide a sectioned space, decorations, tables and chairs for the beer garden. This space is anticipated to be larger than the typical booth space provided at the event and will allow for people to sit at a table, enjoy the music, as well as allow for multiple areas to stand and gather with friends.
A non-profit interested in hosting this event will need to ensure they have sufficient volunteers to staff a much larger vendor space. If necessary, to provide the desired beer garden experience, multiple NonProfit groups could choose to partner. However, this would have to be a separate agreement between the Non-Profit organizations. Only one lead Non-Profit would be selected for the event and would be listed on the California ABC license.
As this is a new type of event for the City there will be some logistics that will need to be worked out.
We ask that the Non-Profit selected for this event be available to partner with the City, when needed, on ideas and set up in order to ensure a true beer garden experience for those attending. The Non-Profit selected for this event would also be required to meet with Recreation Staff in person to review the event space at least one week prior to the event.
If you would like to inquire further about this new event, please contact Alicia O’Leary at the contact below prior to the deadline to submit.
For all other events the non-profit would be expected to provide a minimum of two craft beers and two wines. The non-profit is required to serve beer and wine in cups, not cans, or bottles.
SECTION II
OBJECTIVE
The City of Oakley is requesting proposals from qualified non-profit organizations to supply beer and wine beverage concession at the above listed events.
Ideally, one or more organizations will be selected to be responsible for providing all staff, beer, wine, and any other supplies and equipment necessary for the concession operations for all 2024 event listed above. This concessions agreement is only for beer and wine no additional concessions are included.
1. The Concessionaire will be responsible for providing all staff, beer, wine, and any other supplies and equipment necessary for the concession operations for the 2024 events listed above. The City will provide a small storage area for limited non-alcoholic inventory and equipment storage at the Civic Center Snack Shack. Risk of loss for items stored shall be at Concessionaire’s sole risk.
2. Concessionaire must be able to properly staff all tents simultaneously, as required by the Event Coordinator.
3. The City retains the right to serve, independent of the Concessionaire, non-alcoholic beverages (i.e. water, punch, coffee, cider & soft drinks).
4. Concessionaire will be required to sign a standard agreement and meet the City minimum insurance requirements listing the City as additionally insured.
334
-3-
5. The Concessionaire will be required to work in cooperation with the City of Oakley. A minimum of two pre-planning meetings are required before the event.
5. All staff or volunteers shall be required to wear clothing appropriate to the event and have some indicator of their non-profit organization affiliation such as a pin, banner, tablecloth or tent.
6. Members of your organization are not permitted to consume alcoholic beverages while volunteering/working at the event.
7. Provide a copy of the approved ABC Daily Permit, and proof of valid certified Responsible Beverage Service servers a minimum of one week in advance of the event.
8. Comply with all regulations of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
9. Within 10 business days of the event conclusion, the selected non-profit organization must submit a written report detailing the total sales, profit and how the organization plans to use the profit made to give back to the Oakley community. These numbers will be used to provide estimates to the non-profit selected for future years. Additionally, by the end of January 2025 a summary of the information provided will be presented to the City Council by staff and organizations are encouraged to attend the meeting if available.
SECTION III
PROPOSAL FORM AND CONTENT
To speed and simplify evaluation and to assure that each receives the same orderly consideration, all submittals must follow the format described in this section. Respondents are encouraged to submit concise and clear responses to the RFP.
Deadline for Submission
Proposal submission via email is preferred. Proposals shall be submitted in PDF format and e-mailed to:
[email protected] . Proposals must be received before 9:00 A.M., on February 14th and referenced as Event Beverage Concession Services RFP. Proposals received after the deadline will not be considered and will be disqualified. (The City of Oakley will not be responsible for any errors or omissions in the proposals or any delay in email service).
Proposal Form and Content
All pages of the proposal must be numbered consecutively. The proposal shall not exceed five (5) pages in length, NOT including appendices. The proposal must be organized in accordance with the parts outlined in this Section.
Proposals should be emailed to [email protected] or hand-delivered to the receptionist (please note City Hall closes at Noon):
CITY OF OAKLEY
“Event Beverage Concession Services RFP”
3231 Main Street
335
-4-
Oakley, California 94561
PART 1: Letter of Transmittal
Include a brief letter of transmittal signed by an authorized representative. The cover letter must include the name, address, telephone number and e-mail address of the proposing entity nonprofits proposal. In addition, include the name, title, address, telephone number and e-mail address of the main point of contact for the proposing non-profit.
PART 2: Proposal Summary
Within less than two (2) pages briefly describe your proposal for facilitating beer and wine sales at the events or indicate if you are only applying for a single event. This description should include all the relevant components of the proposal, including a summary review of your organization’s qualifications, relevant experience, organizational capacity and how your organization would use the funds raised to benefit the Oakley community. Clearly outline the delivery schedule, permit application and your staffing/volunteer plan for set up and clean up for each event.
PART 3: Background and Experience
Provide relevant information that explains your organization’s background, experience, and overall capacity to successfully follow through with your proposal. You may want to include specific examples of previous events or programs specifically obtaining ABC licensing and volunteer scheduling.
PART 4: References
Provide contact information for three references. Please include the contact person’s name, relationship, phone, and email address.
PART 5: Additional Information
Feel free to include any other information that you may assist the City in considering your proposal. You may use this section to address those aspects you feel will further distinguish your proposal from others.
SECTION IV
GENERAL INFORMATION
RFP Point of Contact
Questions regarding the RFP should be directed VIA EMAIL ONLY to: Alicia O’Leary at [email protected].
Incurred Costs
The City of Oakley is not liable for any costs incurred by the proposer in the preparation and/or presentation of the proposal.
Equal Opportunity
The City of Oakley requires all proposers to comply with equal opportunity policies. The City of Oakley’s programs, services, employment opportunities, and volunteer positions and contracts are open to all 336
-5-
persons without regard to race, religion, color, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, or political affiliation.
Method of Selection
Members of City Staff will review the proposals and provide comments and recommendations to the City Council -- who will also review the submitted proposals and finalize decisions. All applicants will be notified of the date of the Council meeting.
Agreement
A contract between the City of Oakley and the selected business, group, organization, or individual will define the extent of services to be rendered.
337
338
Created With Tiny Scanner
339
Created With Tiny Scanner
340
341
1265 Dainty Ave Brentwood, CA 94513
Phone: (925) 978 4161
Email: [email protected]
Website: Beexceptionalprograms.com
To Whom It Mat Concern:
Be Exceptional would like to enter this proposal to the City of Oakley for being the Event Beverage Concession Services RFP at some of their events during the 2024 year. I, Joseph Ogo Be Exceptional’s Director/CFO, am the contact regarding this proposal and reside at 400 H St.
Antioch CA, 94509, and can be contacted by phone at with any questions or concerns in regard to this proposal.
Joseph Ogo 02/08/2024
342
1265 Dainty Ave Brentwood, CA 94513
Phone: (925) 978 4161
Email: [email protected]
Website: Beexceptionalprograms.com
This proposal is for Be Exceptional to be responsible for providing all staff, beer, wine, and any other supplies and equipment necessary for the concession operations for the event or events we are chosen for.
We would appreciate consideration for 2 events. Be Exceptional will facilitate the beer and wine sales at events by first consulting with the city of Oakley in at least two preplanning meetings to figure out the appropriate amount of beer and wine to purchase, the number of booths wanted, and how many staff members need to be in attendance. We will provide a minimum of two craft beers and two wines and would serve beer and wine in cups, not cans or bottles. We will make sure we purchase and have the beer and wine on hand at least one week prior to the event. Be Exceptional will have the permits (a copy of the approved ABC Daily Permit, and proof of valid certified Responsible Beverage Service) that are required on hand 2 weeks prior to the event. Be Exceptional already works with the City of Oakley Parks and Recreation and has insurance in place. Our staff will have Be Exceptional shirts on and will follow all policies in place. We would set up and clean up for the event appropriately. We have done booths at events in the past, so we have tables, an awning, and promotional stuff for our organization. Within 10 business days of the event conclusion, Be Exceptional will submit a written report detailing the total sales and profit. Be Exceptional’s goal is to use the funds that we earn to continue to provide inclusive recreational classes and social events for people of all abilities to people within the Oakley area. We are qualified to provide services at the events because of the experience we have had in coordinating several events throughout the years.
343
1265 Dainty Ave Brentwood, CA 94513
Phone: (925) 978 4161
Email: [email protected]
Website: Beexceptionalprograms.com
Be Exceptional has been involved in many community events and is excited to use our experience with the City of Oakley to provide the beer and wine at events. We have put on many recitals throughout the years which has allowed to us learn how to handle volunteer/staff coordination, working with the event hosts, providing food and beverages to purchase during intermission, and providing an inclusive environment to all. We have worked at local wineries and other community events in the past to help provide support (pour beer and wine) to other non-profits when they had fundraisers there. Be Exceptional worked the city of Oakley to do concessions last year at a concert in the park. Be Exceptional appreciates the opportunity to work with the City of Oakley again to provide the beer and wine at some of their events.
References:
Elite Dance Studio- Louise Green -
NHS Skateboard Company Lee CharronSpecial Haven David Chuey-
344
345
346
347
348
349
1 February 12, 2024
City of Oakley
Event Beverage Concession Services RFP
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Dear Ms. Alicia O’Leary,
In response to the City of Oakley’s invitation for nonprofit organizations to apply for the opportunity to participate in the city’s festivals and events as an alcoholic beverage concessionaire, Pillars of Hope, Inc. is once again excited to submit the required proposal in anticipation of obtaining approval. Attached is Pillars’ proposal summarizing the qualifications, experience, organizational capacity, use of funds raised, references, and additional comments.
Pillars is confident in the ability to carry out the responsibilities of a beer and wine concessionaire as demonstrated last year. Since its inception, Pillars has been active in planning and running fundraising events…from Black Tie Dinners to golf tournaments. Pillars offers a level of participation that brings commitment to the events with a fun-loving approach. An opportunity to serve in this position at one or more of the festivals/events in 2024 will be an incredible opportunity and a blessing for Pillars to raise funding and to introduce Pillars to those who have yet to meet the people behind the nonprofit.
This proposal was prepared on behalf of Pillars of Hope, Inc by Debra Brown, Executive Director, and Cathy Seleska, Treasurer. Contact information is noted below.
Pillars of Hope, Inc. Debra Brown Cathy Seleska
Oakley, CA 94561 Oakley, CA 94561 Oakley, CA 94561
Cell: Cell: Cell:
Email: Email: Email:
Website: pillarsofhope.us
Pillars of Hope thanks you for this opportunity to serve Oakley once again to raise funds for Pillars of Hope. We were very pleased with the turnout and support received from the City of Oakley and those in attendance on June 2, 2023’s event. Pillars looks forward to serving again this year and we anticipate the opportunity to possibly serve at more than one event.
Sincerely,
Pillars of Hope, Inc.
Debra Brown, Executive Director
Cathy Seleska, Treasurer
350
2 EVENT BEVERAGE CONCESSION SERVICES
Part 2: Proposal Summary
Pillars of Hope, Inc. strives to make each fundraising event successful for both Pillars and for all in attendance. Impeccable detail is given to all parts of the event…from planning them to the final clean-up. Volunteers and staff step up to represent Pillars in the positive light that it deserves. Pillars’ 2
nd annual golf tournament held in September 2023 was a huge success which netted our nonprofit over $35,000. Pillars of Hope has a dedicated board of directors and has over 30 volunteers who play a very active role in fundraising and advancing our mission to help those exploited by human traffickers. Our Executive Director, Debra Brown, exudes determination. That determination is what Pillars brings to all events; and it will be there for Oakley too.
Pillars of Hope has had relevant experience handling alcohol at many of the fundraising events held since becoming a 501(c)(3) organization in 2011. Pillars was issued a daily ABC license annually from 2013 to 2019 for events such as crab feeds and tri-tip and prawn dinners. We also held a license for the City of Oakley’s Concert in the Park event last June. There have never been any issues at any of these events. Pillars of Hope’s staff and volunteers uphold excellent ethics and maturity, all while having a great time.
Regarding Pillars of Hope’s organizational capacity, resources are generated through grant writing efforts and monthly, individual, corporate, and business donations. Brentwood and Oakley Rotary, as well as the Soroptimist International Organization, have contributed to Pillars of Hope’s in a variety of capacities.
Pillars of Hope’s business infrastructure includes two part-time staff members, six board members, two of which reside in Oakley, and ten advisory board members that include a district attorney, victim advocate, three police officers, an investigator, a therapist, a survivor, a financial advisor, and a lawyer. Pillars currently has 32 volunteers that serve in a variety of ways.
Everyone in the Pillars of Hope’s organization has taken training classes on the impact of human trafficking. Many have taken specialized classes such as trauma informed, de-escalation, and self-care training.
Regarding Pillars of Hope’s culture and climate, the board, staff, and volunteers share in strong work ethics, adhere to policies and procedures, and possess the ability to adapt to change. 351
3 Regarding engagements and partnerships, Pillars has several Memorandums of Understanding with organizations, both locally and statewide, as well as one with a rescue organization in Atlanta, Georgia. Pillars was the proud recipient of the “Making a Difference” award in 2020, sponsored through the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s office.
The funds received through the opportunity to be a concessionaire of beer and wine at Oakley’s 2024 festivals are what Pillars of Hope needs to provide educational presentations and training to city personnel, the Oakley Unified School District board, teachers, and students in grades four through twelve. Pillars is proficient in knowing what human trafficking looks like and how the perpetrators behave and groom a young person to gain their trust. This is where it all begins…and this is where it needs to stop. Social media is a major channel that perpetrators use.
To prevent their children from becoming victims, children and parents must learn how to recognize the behavior and signs of a perpetrator. Currently, training presentations are held at the Laurel Ridge Church in Oakley. Speakers are engaged to offer their expertise in varied subjects surrounding human trafficking. As a small city experiencing the exponential growth it has in recent years, Oakley is being subjected to the same issues that haunt larger cities. Last year Pillars of Hope helped a trafficked individual from Oakley and was able to get her returned safely to her family.
Upon your approval of Pillars of Hope as a designated concessionaire of a beer and wine booth for Oakley’s 2024 festivals, Pillars will coordinate with the Hop Asylum in Brentwood for confirmation of beer and wine, as we did last year. Hop Asylum will be the supplier of the required amount of craft beers and wine and will be instrumental in gauging the required amount necessary to fulfill the agreement with the City of Oakley. Several wineries, mostly local, support Pillars and will be providers of two additional selections of wines. Pillars of Hope will have at least two volunteers who will have a valid Responsible Beverage Service Certificate at the event(s) we are chosen for. All required permits and licenses will be procured within 30 days of the event. Pillars of Hope’s staffing/volunteer plans for set up and clean up for each event will be coordinated as such: the setup team will arrive two hours prior to the start of the event (in accordance with the City of Oakley’s requirements); a second team will work a three to four hour shift; and the third team will work the remainder of the event, including clean up and tear down.
Executive Director, Debra Brown, and Treasurer, Cathy Seleska, will always be available during the entire event with at least one of us in the booth.
352
4 Part 3: Background and Experience
Pillars of Hope, Inc. was established on September 17th, 2010, and has been a 501c3 nonprofit since April 2011. Pillars of Hope, a Bay Area non-profit organization, is based in Oakley and has been active throughout the Bay Area since 2013, providing presentations and training to educate the public about human trafficking and the tactics of exploiters who prey upon the young women and children. Since 2015, the Street Outreach Program has been reaching out to potential victims within the Contra Costa and Solano counties to let them know there is a way out of the life they are ensnared in. In 2019, Pillars of Hope started their Victim & Survivor Assistance Program helping human trafficking victims obtain financial help to flee their trafficker and get into a restorative program. The most common expenses associated with rescuing a victim are for travel, clothing, food, new burner phone, and a brief hotel stay until a program can be located for them.
There are other services that are required when rescuing a victim, or assisting survivors, such as medicine, dental/medical care, removal of tattoos used by their traffickers to brand them, etc. In 2023, Pillars helped 218 individuals with financial assistance to get rescued or transported to programs. The Contra Costa and Alameda County District Attorney offices, as well as two rescue organizations and a street outreach partner, work closely with Pillars.
Pillars of Hope has held annual fundraisers since 2011 for which daily ABC licenses were required. These eight events, seven which included crab feeds and prawns and tri-tip fundraisers, were held at the Pittsburg Senior Center from 2013 through 2019. Pillars of Hope held the City of Oakley Concert in the Park event on June 2nd last year. Several other events, the Black-Tie Dinner Fundraisers at the Oakhurst Country Club in Clayton, and Pillars’ first and second annual golf tournament in 2022 and 2023 held at the Lone Tree Golf & Event Center in Antioch, were held at facilities where alcohol was served under their licenses. All events were without any incidents.
Pillars of Hope’s staff and volunteers are committed to bringing strong work ethics and morally upstanding behavior to the City of Oakley’s festivals and events in 2024.
Pillars of Hope was very pleased with the turnout and support received from the City of Oakley and those in attendance on June 2
nd’s event. Pillars looks forward to serving again this year and we anticipate the opportunity to serve at two events.
353
5 Part 4: References:
Mary Knox, Contra Costa County Deputy District Attorney; Pillars of Hope’s Advisory Board Member
Phone: Email:
Chuck Blazer, Human Trafficking Investigator, Contra Costa County District Attorney’s office, Pillars of Hope’s Advisory Board Member
Phone: Email:
Louise Reeves, Inspector II - Alameda County District Attorney’s office; Pillars of Hope’s Advisory Board Member
Phone: Email:
Part 5: Additional Information:
Pillars of Hope is working to increase awareness about human trafficking in Contra Costa County and in its community. Pillars is excited to be a prominent fixture at the Oakley festivals.
Oakley’s residents will be able to meet the people behind Pillars and get a greater understanding of what it is all about. Pillars’ goal is to provide a rescue facility in Contra Costa County providing restoration and healing to human-trafficking victims, and with the grace of God this will happen.
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
3 2 1 0
Organization
Submits application complete, on time,
has a website and has at least 500
followers on one of Facebook,
Instagram or X.
Submits application complete and on
time plus has a website and provides a
description of items for sale.
Submits application complete and on
time and includes description of items
for sale.
Submits application complete and on
time.
Past Performance
Have served as a vendor w/o issues or
have never been a vendor previously.
N/A N/A Have served as a vendor in the past
but had issues with timelines, customer
service, following instructions or safety
protocols for an event, or no-showed
for event after being selected.
Community
Is an Oakley based business with an
Oakley mailing address.
Business based outside of Oakley City
limits but with a mailing address within
a 20-mile radius of Oakley.
Business with mailing address in
Contra Costa County.
A business not based in Oakley or
Contra Costa County.
Business License
Business possesses a current and up
to date Oakley Business License.
Business does not possess a current
and up to date Oakley Business
License.
Craftsmanship
Items handmade by vendor, original
pieces of artistry.
Items that are mass produced but
made by vendor or Oakley based
service business.
Items that are mass produced,
purchased and resold by vendor, or
non-Oakley based service businesses.
N/A
3 2 1 0
Community Partner
Status
Written agreement for non-profit grant. Other agreement for partnership such as joint use.
City does not have written agreement. City has previously terminated partnership.
Community
Is an Oakley based non-profit with an
Oakley mailing address.
Non-profit based outside of Oakley but
with a mailing address within a 20-mile
radius of Oakley
Non-profit with mailing address in
Contra Costa County.
A non-profit not based in Oakley or
Contra Costa County.
Organization
Submits application complete and on
time, has a website and has at least
100 followers on one of Facebook,
Instagram or X
Submits application complete and on
time plus has a website.
Submits application complete and on
time.
N/A
Participant
Interaction
Booth includes interactive activity that
community can take part in.
Booth includes a free item handout. Booth includes informational handout. Nothing is available for for participants to do or take home.
Vendor Selection Criteria
Non-Profit Selection Criteria
361
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: March 12, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Ken Strelo, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03- 22, FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22) – Request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Final Development Plan, Tentative Map, and Design Review for a 9.99 acre, 83 unit single family residential subdivision project. APN 037-110-031.
Summary
This is an application by Owen Poole and Dan Cosgrove (“Applicant”) requesting approval of 1) a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to redesignate 9.99 acres from Commercial (CO) to Residential Medium (RM); 2) a Rezone (RZ 03-22) of 9.99 acres from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District; 3) a Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22) for development of the 9.99 acres site; 4) a Tentative Map (TM 04-22) to subdivide 9.99 acres into 83 single family residential lots, additional on-site parking, a toddler park, community gathering areas, and other improvements; and 5) a Design Review (DR 07-22) for floor plans and architecture of three home types with three elevations and three color schemes, and landscaping and other improvements throughout the project (“Project”). This project includes compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. The site is located at 2092 Oakley Road and is zoned C (General Commercial) District. APN 037-110-031.
Background
GENERAL PLAN
Existing Land Use Designation
Commercial (“CO”) – The CO designation allows for a broad range of commercial uses typically found adjacent to residential neighborhoods, downtowns, and freeways.
Proposed Land Use Designation
Residential Medium (“RM”) – The RM designation provides for more affordable, small lot development and to increase the availability of rental or entry-level housing.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
362
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us ZONING
Current Zoning District
C (General Commercial) District – The purpose of the C District is to create and maintain major commercial centers accommodating a broad range of commercial uses (e.g., office, retail, and personal services) of community-wide or regional significance typically found adjacent to or along major travel corridors, such as Main Street, O’Hara Avenue, Laurel Avenue and Empire Avenue.
Proposed Zoning District
P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District – The purpose of the P-1 District is to allow diversification in the relationship of various uses, buildings, structures, lot sizes and open spaces, ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, and to ensure substantial compliance with the General Plan and the intent of the Municipal Code in requiring adequate standards necessary to satisfy the requirements of the public health, safety and general welfare.
SITE CONDITIONS AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
The subject property is a
rectangular shaped site with an
approximately 625-foot frontage
along Oakley Road, and an
approximately 120-foot frontage
along Main Street in the
northeast corner (See Figure 1.
Aerial of Project Site).
The property has two existing
single-family residences: one
along Oakley Road, and another
near the existing wireless
communication facility.
There is also an existing mobile
home community known as the
Eagle City Mobile Home Park
located to the north and west of
the site. These parcels are designated Residential Mobile Home (“RMH”) within Oakley’s General Plan. The parcels to the southwest contain existing single-family residences and are designated as Residential Medium (“RM”). Directly to the east of the site are the Valvoline Instant Oil Change service station and the 7-11 gas station.
Figure 1. Aerial of Project Site
363
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 3
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us
PRELIMINARY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT WORK SESSION
On March 22, 2022, the City Council held a Preliminary General Plan Amendment Work Session (Planning Application PA 0-21) to discuss the merits of this potential project. The applicant presented three separate concepts for the site to help visualize how a project under the Residential Medium (“RM”) designation may look.
After receiving Staff’s Report and comments from the applicant, the City Council opened the Work Session up for public comments and followed with their own questions and comments to the Applicant. Feedback from the City Council ranged from questions on the commercial viability of the site to potential amenities in a future project. An excerpt from the adopted minutes is included as an attachment to this Staff Report.
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING (FEBRUARY 6, 2024)
The City of Oakley Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed project at a regular scheduled meeting on February 6, 2024. During that meeting, the role of the Planning Commission was to receive the presentation and testimony by the applicant and public, deliberate, and eventually render a decision on a recommendation to the City Council on the environmental findings and whether to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the project, including any recommended modifications to the project. No public comments were received on the project.
After deliberations, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2-24 recommending the City Council make findings and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Ordinance, and Resolution approving the project, as conditioned. A copy of the adopted meeting minutes and Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24 are attached to this Staff Report.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24 included several conditions of approval that required modification to the project and associated plans prior to presentation to the City Council. Some of those modifications included: clarifying development standards on the Final Development Plan; including an 8-foot tall decorative, splitface CMU between the project and commercial development to the east of the project; inclusion of regulations or prohibitions of accessory structures on the Final Development Plan; and revisions to home architecture to include false shutters as appropriate and a different garage door design for each architectural type.
Project Description
The proposed project would include amending the General Plan Land Use Designation of an underutilized commercial site currently occupied by two homes and a vineyard to a fully developed single-family residential subdivision operated by a homeowner’s association. Other related entitlements associated with this application include a Rezone, Final Development Plan, Tentative Map, and Design 364
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 4
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Review. All homes are proposed as two-story structures with front porches loaded onto landscaped pedestrian pathways and rear garages loaded onto the neighborhood’s streets. Fourteen of the homes are proposed to have their porches front onto Oakley Road. Those home’s garages would also be at the rear of the homes and accessed from the interior street. Each of the proposed entitlements is further described in the following subsections:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA 01-22)
The project includes a request to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation on the 9.99-acre site from Commercial (“CO”) to Residential Medium (“RM”). The RM designation allows for single family and multi-family residential construction at a density between 5.5 and 9.6 dwelling units per gross acre. The project is proposed at 8.3 dwelling units per gross acre. Approval of this General Plan Amendment allows the other associated entitlements to be consistent with the underlying General Plan Land Use Designation. The requested General Plan Amendment and associated project entitlements may be simultaneously analyzed and considered for approval as one project application.
REZONE (RZ 03-22)
The project application includes a request for approval of a Rezone from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District that is tied to the proposed Final Development Plan and Tentative Map. The proposed P-1 District would allow for the unique project design that includes private, HOA-maintained road, rear garages, and pedestrian oriented fronts to the homes. A P-1 District has no impact on the allowable density of the underlying General Plan Land Use Designation. Table 1 provides a summary of the P-1 District’s proposed Development Regulations.
Table 1. P-1 District’s Proposed Development Regulations Min. Lot Size
(sf.)
Front Yard
Setback (ft.)
Side Yard
Setback (ft.)
Corner Side Yard
Setback (ft.) per Plan
Garage/Rear
Yard Setback
(ft.)
Project’s
P-1 District 2,920 9 4
7 (entry way)
4 (parking areas)
13 (interior roads)
5 FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (FDP 02-22)
A Final Development Plan (“FDP”) is a component of a P-1 District. The applicant is choosing to combine the FDP application with the Rezone application, which is allowed per the “Planned Unit Development (P-1)” section of the Oakley Municipal Code (Section
9.1.1002). The FDP includes the information provided on the Vesting Tentative Map and its related plans, as well as other information such as details on housing or elevations and heights of non-residential buildings. When FDPs are processed after a P-1 District 365
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 5
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us is formed, the P-1 District will usually include a Preliminary Development Plan; however, an applicant may submit a FDP with a P-1 District rezone application so that it may be considered in conjunction with the rest of the project entitlements, such as what has occurred with this application. The proposed FDP will approve the general layout design, number of lots, types of residential structures, etc. Any requested change to the approved FDP would be reviewed by the Planning Commission/City Council where that body would determine whether the change is substantial enough to warrant a public hearing in order to further review the request.
TENTATIVE MAP (TM 04-22)
The proposed project would result in the subdivision of approximately 9.99 acres into a new single-family residential subdivision of 83 lots, including additional on-site parking, a toddler park, and community gathering areas. Other improvements will include frontage dedication and improvements along Oakley Road, internal private street network, pedestrian access to the front porches of the interior lots, and stormwater detention/bioretention areas. The development will be managed and maintained by a homeowner’s association; however, due to the proximity to Oakley Road and Empire Avenue intersection, it will not include vehicle gates at the entry. As proposed, the gross density (includes all area before right of way dedication, parks, landscaping, etc.) is 8.3 dwelling units per gross acre (du/ga). Residential lot sizes ranging between 2,920 and 3,790 square feet (sf), and an average residential lot size of 2,986 sf. Most lots have a 40-foot wide frontage.
Access, Circulation and Parking
Access to the neighborhood streets would by a main entrance off of Oakley Road (See Figure 2. Rendering of Neighborhood Entrance). A secondary, 21-foot wide emergency vehicle access (“EVA”) will connect to Main Street in the northwest corner of the project. The EVA would be blocked to vehicular traffic by removable bollards; however, it will be open to pedestrians and connect direct to Main Street and connect indirectly to Main Street further to the north via an ADA accessible pedestrian pathway.
The internal street network is laid out in a grid pattern. A total of 120 on-street parking spaces are proposed as 90-degree spaces along the two east/west-oriented streets, and the north/south oriented street adjacent to the commercial properties to the east.
Parallel parking along all internal streets would be prohibited by the HOA. All internal streets provide access to the two-car garages located at the rear of the homes. Offstreet parking is limited to garages as there is not sufficient private driveway length to accommodate vehicle parking.
366
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 6
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Oakley Road/Main Street Dedication and Improvements
The project is conditioned to dedicate approximately 20 additional feet of right of way along the Oakley Road property line for a total right of way half-width of 55 feet.
Improvements within that area would include additional street pavement, new curb and gutter, 6.5 feet of new landscaping, and 6.5 feet of sidewalk. The back of sidewalk would align with the future front property lines of the 14 lots that will front Oakley Road.
Additional right of way is not required to be dedicated along Main Street, but the project is conditioned to install new curb and gutter, 6.5 feet of landscaping, and 4 feet of sidewalk. The applicant would also improve the Oakley Road center median to its full width, some of which may be available for fee credits. Due to the proximity to the Oakley Road/Empire Avenue intersection, the project entry will be right in/right out only.
Proposed Landscape Plans
The proposed landscape plans are included as Sheets L-1.1 through L-12. The information on those plans provides an Illustrative Overall Plan that shows all proposed tree locations and landscaped areas overlaid onto an aerial of the site and surrounding properties, and a Preliminary Landscape Plan that calls out different areas on the site plan and acts as a key for the other included details. Other sheets provide Wall and Fence Plan and Details, Typical House Cluster Enlargement, Open Space Enlargement, Parking Area Concept, Project Entry Enlargement, the Plant Palette, Site Amenities such as the playground furniture and equipment and open space structures, and construction and irrigation details.
Figure 2. Rendering of Neighborhood Entrance
367
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 7
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Fencing throughout the site will consist
of 6-foot tall board on board wood
fencing. Exterior property lines shared
with the mobile home park will be
completely solid while fencing protecting
private side yards of the lots will have 1-
foot of lattice at the top. Wooden entry
gates to the private yards will match the
fencing, including the lattice top. The 14
lots that front Oakley Road will have a
low picket fence at the back of sidewalk
(See Figure 3. Low Picket Fence Along
Oakley Road). There is an existing
slatted chain link fence between a
portion of the existing commercial businesses to the east and the project site. The remaining portion of that boundary has no fencing. The proposed plans include installation of an 8-foot tall decorative, split-face CMU wall between the existing commercial properties to the east and the proposed development, as well as between Main Street and the proposed development. The exact location of this wall between the adjacent commercial properties and development may need to be coordinated with the adjacent land owners to ensure installation of the wall does not result in unseen areas that may attract trash or other public nuisances. Final location will be subject to Staff approval.
One component related to the site landscaping is the Arborist Report that identifies all existing trees on site and discloses if any are classified as “Protected Trees” pursuant to the City’s Heritage and Protected Trees ordinance (Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.1.1120). The project’s arborist report was prepared by Atlas Tree Service and is dated September 15, 2022. In summary, the report identified 16 living trees on the property, none of which classified as “Protected Trees;” however, there are two non-native pine trees located near the border of the site with Main Street.
The project applicant has shown these two trees as remaining as part of the project design.
DESIGN REVIEW (DR 07-22)
As part of the Design Review application, the applicant is proposing house floor plans, architecture, color and material schemes, landscaping plans (including conceptual street tree layout and park equipment), and fence plans. Since the landscaping was covered in the Tentative Map project description, this section will focus on the homes.
There are three different floor plans ranging from 1,848 sf. to 2,236 sf. of livable area.
All plans are two story homes with two-car garages. Table 2 provides a summary of the proposed floor plans.
Figure 3. Low Picket Fence Along Oakley Road
368
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 8
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Table 2. Summary of Proposed Floor Plans
Livable Area
SF
1st Story / 2nd
Story SF Bedrooms Bathrooms Garage SF/cars
Plan 1 1,848 892 / 956 4 bedrooms 3 429 / 2
Plan 2 2,083 1,006 / 1,077 4 bedrooms 3 441 / 2
Plan 3 2,236 1,095 / 1,141 5 bedrooms
or 4 w/ opt. loft 3 420 / 2
In addition to the three floor plans are three architectural styles, referred to as Spanish, Farmhouse, and Bungalow. Each of the three architectural styles has three color and material themes tied specifically to that style. Figure 4 shows the conceptual streetscape at the project entry.
Figure 4. Conceptual Streetscape at the Project Entry
Environmental Review
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT COMPLIANCE
An Initial Study (“IS”) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) have been prepared for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). Raney Planning and Management conducted the CEQA analysis survey on behalf of the City of Oakley. The Notice of Intent (“NOI”) to Adopt an MND and IS was circulated for public review and comment from November 16, 2023 to December 18, 2023. It was filed with the County Clerk and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”), distributed to over 60 public agencies and parties requesting such notice, and posted in the same manner as a Notice of Public hearing, which is at locations throughout the City and at the project site. The NOI provided a summary of the project as well as methods to access the IS/MND for review and comment. No comments were received by the City within the commenting period for the NOI, nor were any comment letters received after the commenting period for the NOI.
Analysis in the IS found eight (8) of the 21 impact categories require mitigation to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. All other 13 impact categories 369
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 9
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us were found to have either no impacts or less than significant impacts. A summary of the mitigation measures can be found in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, included as Exhibit “A” to the Proposed Resolution attached to this Staff Report.
Since the Planning Commission is making recommendations to the City Council on the entitlements associated with this application, they will also make a recommendation for adoption of the MND to the City Council. Recommendation for adoption of the MND is included in the proposed resolution for recommendation for approval of the other entitlements associated with the project. The NOI and IS/MND are included as attachments to this Staff Report.
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN This project is subject to the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (“HCP/NCCP” or “HCP Plan”). Projects that are subject to the HCP Plan are required to submit a Planning Survey Report (“PSR”) as part of the project application. The contents of the PSR help guide the project through compliance with both the California and Federal Endangered Species Act by assuming presence of certain plant and animal species and requiring additional surveys to be done prior to any ground disturbance. In addition, whether species are found or not, the project must pay development impact fees for each acre, or fraction thereof, of disturbed land not already considered “urban” under the HCP Plan. Those development impact fees are used to help create, install, and maintain habitat outside of the Urban Limit Line, as well as administer the HCP Plan. The project would contribute $198,520.38 to the HCP/NCCP program under the impact fees current as of the date of this staff report.
Analysis
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
Requests for amendments to the underlying General Plan land use designation on a property should be considered with respect to surrounding uses and their respective land use designations. The 9.99-acre project site is bordered on the west and north by an existing residential mobile home park to the south by Oakley Road with existing residential uses and a vacant Commercially designated site beyond, and to the east by a gas station with convenience store and drive-through oil change facility. Commercial adjacent to residential is common and in most cases a commercially designated area will eventually border a residentially designated area.
With proper design the two land uses can co-exist adjacent to each other.
Amending the General Plan Land Use designation to Residential Medium (“RM”) would make the property more consistent with surrounding residential uses, but less consistent with the adjacent commercial uses. However, since this property is not 370
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 10
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us located on a major arterial roadway, the amendment will allow for additional infill housing that will be located near public transit and existing commercial uses. The project design and conditions of approval will minimize the potential issues that could arise with residential and commercial adjacent to teach other.
Staff recommends City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment.
REZONE/FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
When rendering a decision on approval of a Rezone to P-1 District and approval of a Final Development Plan, the City Council shall be satisfied that the following are true (summarized from OMC section 9.1.1002):
The applicant intends to start construction within two years from the effective date of the zoning change;
The development is consistent with the General Plan;
If residential, it has sustained desirability and stability, and is in harmony with the character of surrounding neighborhoods; and
The development of a harmonious, integrated plan justifies exceptions from the normal application of the OMC.
The Applicant has stated they are unsure if they will function as developer or sell the property or rights to develop the property; however, construction within two years is reasonable with either option, depending on market conditions. The density and type of development is consistent with the General Plan, and the project integrates pedestrian connectivity to Main Street and nearby commercial developments. Vehicular transportation will have almost immediate access to major arterials such as Empire Avenue and Main Street. The type of development is expected to be desirable in that it includes a variety of homes sizes on smaller lots with an HOA which can appeal to those less interested in large private yards that require maintenance and that may value nearby access to public transportation and walkable amenities. The other HOA amenities such as the park and public gathering areas are additional attractions for the project. The development will be a harmonious and integrated plan that includes exceptions from the normal application of the Oakley Municipal Code due to the number and size of amenities usually found in larger subdivisions, such as a park, public gathering areas, and pedestrian-only entries to front porches. The P-1 District is justified to allow for project-specific development regulations in order to design a feasible project within the allowable range of the General Plan Land Use Designation of RM.
371
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 11
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Staff recommends City Council approval of the proposed Rezone and Final Development Plan.
TENTATIVE MAP
The Tentative Map (“TM”) has been reviewed against all applicable codes including the Subdivision Map Act, General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance. The TM’s gross density (approximately 8.3 du/ga) falls within the gross density range of the Residential Medium (RM) General Plan Land Use Designation of 5.5-9.6 du/ga. The TM is tied to a P-1 District, which has proposed project-specific development regulations, such as required yard setbacks and minimum lot sizes.
The site is physically suitable for the project in that: it is accessible; not physically constrained other than by the reduction in net developable acres due to frontage right of way dedication, onsite stormwater detention and treatment, in-tract park, and in-tract public gathering areas; is similar to surrounding residentially developed projects; and it is also able to accommodate the proposed density of development in a manner consistent with the underlying land use designation of RM. The subdivision is not expected to result in any serious public health problems. Public improvements are proposed and conditioned to occur as a result of the subdivision, which is a benefit to the public and surrounding residents and property owners of the vicinity. One such improvement will be the dedication and frontage improvements along Oakley Road, which currently lacks any sort of curb, gutter, or sidewalk for pedestrian or bicycle safety.
Staff recommends City Council approval of the proposed Tentative Map.
DESIGN REVIEW
Analysis for Design Review refers to the Standards for Review as laid out in OMC section 9.1.1604(f), which focuses on site planning, architecture, landscaping and site elements, and streetscapes. With these standards in mind, the proposed plans were analyzed for consistency with the adopted City of Oakley Residential Guidelines (“Guidelines”).
Neighborhood Layout and Design
The project has been designed so that all streets will function as residential streets that provide access to the rear garages for each home. This is a unique and new design for development in Oakley and will add to the product mix available to first-time homebuyers and those looking to move into a newer or larger home that does not require as much outdoor space maintenance while still including outdoor spaces such as the proposed park and public gathering areas. Also, the front doors will be accessible by pedestrian walkways that run through landscaped corridors. The nearby public transportation on Main Street and commercial shopping center nearly adjacent to 372
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 12
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us the project or within one-half mile will provide additional amenities to residents without the need to drive to the location.
Residential Siting and Lot Design
The applicant has designed the homes so that nearly every lot has the same setback to the respective garage and porch area. This is typically not ideal when homes are plotted on public streets and include larger yard spaces; however, this is a unique project given the attention to pedestrian paseos running along the front of the homes.
Figure 5 shows the illustration of the view from one of the paseos to the entry of the pedestrian pathway connections to the front of the homes.
Building mass is an element of lot siting and
design and can affect the aesthetics of the
overall neighborhood. For the proposed
project, changes in roof materials and design
among the same floor plan assist in giving
the overall neighborhood more visual variety.
Some changes are to the main roof line,
while others focus on the projecting
elements such as porches.
Two common Oakley Design Guidelines look for new single family residential to achieve a minimum of 20% single-story homes and that at least 50% of all corner lots be singlestory homes, and another is to maintain at least a 15-foot setback between adjacent second story elements. Often with P-1 District developments the lot sizes are reduced in both size and width which leads to architects needing to design a two-story home in order to achieve the desirable square footage of the market in a manner that meets the developer’s criteria as well. A single-story home is more feasible when lots are closer to 5,000 square feet or more, leaving room for the square footage of the home to take up a larger footprint. For the density and lot size of this project, single-story homes are not feasible.
Architectural Character
The architectural character and design of the proposed homes meets several of the design guidelines. There is variation in materials between architectural styles, such as roofing, veneer, and siding. The three color schemes for each architectural style complement each other while allowing for uniqueness to any given home with the eyesight of another. In addition to colors and materials, each architectural style is tied to a specific garage door and exterior lighting design.
Figure 5. Paseo and Pedestrian Pathway
373
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 13
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us The Planning Commission required specific architectural modifications for better implementation of the design guidelines as summarized below. The current plans include all of these changes.
Exterior lighting specific to each architectural type and/or theme lighting for pedestrian paseo areas to be shown on the proposed elevations; Integration of false shutters on the front and rear elevations as feasible and in tune with the respective architectural styles;
The use of different garage door designs for each architectural style including integration of garage windows, if feasible.
Staff recommends City Council approval of the proposed Design Review.
Findings
Draft findings can be found in the proposed resolution.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
Approval of this application would be consistent with the goals in the section of the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+ entitled, “Community and Economic Development Goal”.
Reviewing applications for compliance with Oakley’s development standards ensures strategic and thoughtful growth.
Fiscal Impact
The approval of these entitlements will not impact the General Fund. This is a developer funded account. All Staff time and City of Oakley generated materials are charged to the account and paid for by the developer.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project titled, “The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03-22, FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22)” as conditioned.
Attachments
1. Vicinity Map
2. Notice of Public Hearing
374
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 14
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us
3. Applicant’s Plans
4. City Council Minutes from March 22, 2022 - Excerpt of Project’s Preliminary General Plan Amendment Work Session (Item 7.2)
5. Planning Commission Staff Report from February 6, 2024
6. Planning Commission Minutes from February 6, 2024
7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2-24
8. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
9. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
10.Proposed Ordinance (Rezone)
11.Proposed Resolution (General Plan Amendment)
12.Proposed Resolution (Final Development Plan, Tentative Map, Design Review) with Exhibit “A” Mitigation Monitoring Program
375
Vicinity Map
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03-22, FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22) 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, CA 94561 APN: 037-110-031
376
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that on March 12, 2024 at 6:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council of the City of Oakley will hold a Public Hearing at the Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 for the purposes of considering an application for a project as described below:
Project Name: The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03-22, FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22).
Project Location: 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, CA 94561. APN 037-110-031.
Applicant: Owen Poole, 151 Spyrock Court, Walnut Creek, CA 94595.
Request: Application by Owen Poole (“Applicant”) requesting approval of 1) a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to redesignate 9.99 acres from Commercial (CO) to Residential Medium (RM); 2) a Rezone (RZ 03-22) of 9.99 acres from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District; 3) a Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22) for development of the 9.99 acres site; 4) a Tentative Map (TM 04-22) to subdivide 9.99 acres into 83 single family residential lots, additional on-site parking, a toddler park, community gathering areas, and other improvements; and 5) a Design Review (DR 07-22) for floor plans and architecture of three homes types with three elevations and three color schemes, and landscaping and other improvements throughout the project (“Project”). This project includes compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. The site is located at 2092 Oakley Road and is zoned “C” (General Commercial) District. APN 037-110-031.
How to Review: The Staff Report and its attachments will be available for public review, on or before March 7, 2024 at City Hall, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 or online at www.ci.oakley.ca.us/agendas-minutes-videos-archive/ by navigating to the March 12, 2024 City Council agenda and clicking the project title link. (Note: City Hall is closed on the 1st and 3rd Fridays of each month). Interested persons are invited to submit written comments prior to and may testify at the public hearing. Written comments may be submitted to Ken Strelo, Planning Manager at the City of Oakley, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 or by email to [email protected].
NOTICE IS ALSO GIVEN pursuant to Government Code Section 65009(b) that, if this matter is subsequently challenged in Court by you or others, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else has raised at a Public Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Oakley City Clerk at, or prior to, the Public Hearing. 377
378
OAKLEY ROAD
MAIN STREET
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL D
PARCEL E PARCEL F
PARCEL D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
24 23
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
43 41
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
65 64
63 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 OAKLEY ROAD
42 44 A STREET
B STREET
G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET
OAKLEY ROAD A STREET
B STREET
G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET
379
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL D
PARCEL E PARCEL F
PARCEL D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
24 23
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
43 41
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
65 64
63 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 OAKLEY ROAD
42 44 A STREET
B STREET
G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET
VICINITY MAP
380
OAKLEY ROAD
MAIN STREET
D
D
381
F STREET (PRIVATE)
B STREET (PRIVATE) A STREET (PRIVATE)
C STREET (PRIVATE) D & E STREET (PRIVATE)
G STREET (PRIVATE)
382
OAKLEY ROAD (PUBLIC)
MAIN STREET (PUBLIC)
OAKLEY ROAD (PUBLIC)
383
OAKLEY ROAD
MAIN STREET
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL D
PARCEL E PARCEL F
PARCEL D
OAKLEY ROAD A STREET
B STREET
G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET SEE THIS SHEET SEE THIS SHEET 384
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL D
PARCEL E PARCEL F
PARCEL D
OAKLEY ROAD
MAIN STREET A STREET
B STREET
G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET
385
386
387
MAIN STREET PARCEL D A STREET 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
OAKLEY ROAD A STREET
388
PARCEL A
PARCEL B
PARCEL C
PARCEL D
PARCEL E PARCEL F
PARCEL D 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
24 23
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
43 41
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
65 64
63 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 OAKLEY ROAD
42 44 A STREET
B STREET
G STREET C STREET D STREET E STREET F STREET MAIN STREET DMA 1A
118,202 SF
DMA 3A 156,910 SF DMA 3B 6,991 SF
IMP 2
3,294 SF
DMA 10A
1,024 SF
DMA 10B
5,348 SF DMA 11B
11,009 SF DMA 12B
12,534 SF
DMA 11A
2,200 SF DMA 12A
1,781 SF
DMA 1B
11,211 SF
IMP 1
2,748 SF
IMP 3
3,556 SF
DMA 2A 81,299 SF DMA 2B 10,014 SF
DMA 4
6,343 SF
IMP 10
1,023 SF
IMP 11
2,045 SF
IMP 12
1,644 SF
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
V
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
14'-5" x 14'-0"
PRIMARY
BATH
BEDROOM 2
10'-1" x 11'-0"
BEDROOM 3
10'-1" x 11'-0"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
WALK-IN
CLOSET
32'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0" 6'-2" 4'-0" 52'-4" 11'-8" 5'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
20'-5" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
DINING
14'-5" x 7'-0"
FAMILY
16'-5" x 14'-3"
BEDROOM 4
10'-1" x 10'-1"
ENTRY
BATH 3
PORCH
LINEN
PANTRY
UP 15'-8" 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
892 SQ. FT.
956 SQ. FT.
1848 SQ. FT.
429 SQ. FT.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 1 SPANISH FLOOR PLANS
A03
412
4 :12
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
V.
4 :12 RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY
RIDGE
RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12 RIDGE
VALLEY
VALLEY 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
SPANISH ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 1 SPANISH ROOF PLAN
A04
413
414
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
14'-5" x 14'-0"
PRIMARY
BATH
BEDROOM 2
10'-1" x 11'-0"
BEDROOM 3
10'-1" x 11'-0"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
WALK-IN
CLOSET
32'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0" 10'-2" 52'-4" 11'-8" 5'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
20'-5" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
DINING
14'-5" x 7'-0"
FAMILY
16'-5" x 14'-3"
BEDROOM 4
10'-1" x 10'-1"
ENTRY
BATH 3
PORCH
LINEN
PANTRY
UP 15'-8" 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
892 SQ. FT.
956 SQ. FT.
1848 SQ. FT.
429 SQ. FT.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 1 BUNGALOW FLOOR PLANS
A06
415
4 :12
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
HIP
4 :12 RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY
RIDGE
RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12 RIDGE
VALLEY
VALLEY
VALLEY 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
BUNGALOW ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 1 BUNGALOW ROOF PLAN
A07
416
417
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
14'-5" x 14'-0"
PRIMARY
BATH
BEDROOM 2
10'-1" x 11'-0"
BEDROOM 3
10'-1" x 11'-0"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
WALK-IN
CLOSET
32'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0" 10'-2" 52'-4" 11'-8" 5'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
20'-5" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
DINING
14'-5" x 7'-0"
FAMILY
16'-5" x 14'-3"
BEDROOM 4
10'-1" x 10'-1"
ENTRY
BATH 3
PORCH
LINEN
PANTRY
UP 15'-8" 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
892 SQ. FT.
956 SQ. FT.
1848 SQ. FT.
429 SQ. FT.
SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 1 FARMHOUSE FLOOR PLANS
A09
418
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12 RIDGE
4 :12
7 :12
VALLEY
RIDGE
RIDGE RIDGE
7 :12
4 :12 4 :12 RIDGE
VALLEY
VALLEY VALLEY
7 :12 RIDGE7 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
FARMHOUSE ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 1 FARMHOUSE ROOF PLAN
A10
419
420
421
15'-0" 53'-0" 5'-0"
32'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
21'-1" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
DINING
9'-10" x 15'-0"
FAMILY
16'-5" x 15'-5"
BEDROOM 4
10'-1" x 10'-4"
ENTRY
BATH 3
PORCH
PANTRY
UP
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
PRIMARY 15'-6" x 13'-8"
BATH
BEDROOM 2
11'-0" x 12'-1"
BEDROOM 3
11'-2" x 11'-3"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
WALK-IN
CLOSET 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2 SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
1006 SQ. FT.
1077 SQ. FT.
2083 SQ. FT.
441 SQ. FT.
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 2 SPANISH FLOOR PLANS
A13
422
4 :12
5 :12
5 :12
V.
4 :12 RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY
RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE
4 :12
3 :12 3 :12 RIDGE
VALLEY
VALLEY R. 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
SPANISH ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 2 SPANISH ROOF PLAN
A14
423
424
15'-0" 53'-0" 5'-0"
32'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
21'-1" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
DINING
9'-10" x 15'-0"
FAMILY
16'-5" x 15'-5"
BEDROOM 4
10'-1" x 10'-4"
ENTRY
BATH 3
PORCH
PANTRY
UP
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
PRIMARY 15'-6" x 13'-8"
BATH
BEDROOM 2
11'-0" x 12'-1"
BEDROOM 3
11'-2" x 11'-3"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
WALK-IN
CLOSET 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2 SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
1006 SQ. FT.
1077 SQ. FT.
2083 SQ. FT.
441 SQ. FT.
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 2 BUNGALOW FLOOR PLANS
A16
425
4 :12
5 :12
5 :12
V.
4 :12 RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY
RIDGE RIDGE R.
4 :12
3 :12 3 :12 RIDGE
VALLEY
VALLEY R. RIDGE
4 :12
4 :12 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
BUNGALOW ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 2 BUNGALOW ROOF PLAN
A17
426
427
15'-0" 53'-0" 5'-0"
32'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
21'-1" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
DINING
9'-10" x 15'-0"
FAMILY
16'-5" x 15'-5"
BEDROOM 4
10'-1" x 10'-4"
ENTRY
BATH 3
PORCH
PANTRY
UP
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
PRIMARY 15'-6" x 13'-8"
BATH
BEDROOM 2
11'-0" x 12'-1"
BEDROOM 3
11'-2" x 11'-3"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
WALK-IN
CLOSET 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 2 SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
1006 SQ. FT.
1077 SQ. FT.
2083 SQ. FT.
441 SQ. FT.
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 2 FARMHOUSE FLOOR PLANS
A19
428
7 :12
5 :12
5 :12
7 :12 RIDGE
3 :12
7 :12
VALLEY
RIDGE RIDGE
7 :12
3 :12 3 :12 RIDGE
VALLEY R.
VALLEY
VALLEY
7 :12 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
FARMHOUSE ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 2 FARMHOUSE ROOF PLAN
A20
429
430
431
15'-0" 53'-0"
32'-0" 5'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
20'-1" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
NOOK
11'-1" x 11'-1"
FAMILY
15'-6" x 13'-7"
BEDROOM 4 ENTRY 11'-7" x 10'-6"
BATH 3
PANTRY
UP
FLEX
10'-9" x 12'-0"
PORCH
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
12'-9" x 14'-0" PRIMARY
BATH
BEDROOM 2
11'-0" x 11'-10"
BEDROOM 3
13'-6" x 11'-0"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
LOFT/ OPT.
BEDROOM 5
11'-7" x 13'-0" 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 3 SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
1095 SQ. FT.
1141 SQ. FT.
2236 SQ. FT.
420 SQ. FT.
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 3 SPANISH FLOOR PLANS
A23
432
4 :12
5 :12
5 :12
4 :12
4 :12
4 :12 4 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY
RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE
3 :12
3 :12 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
SPANISH ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 3 SPANISH ROOF PLAN
A24
433
434
15'-0" 53'-0"
32'-0" 5'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
20'-1" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
NOOK
11'-1" x 11'-1"
FAMILY
15'-6" x 13'-7"
BEDROOM 4 ENTRY 11'-7" x 10'-6"
BATH 3
PANTRY
UP
FLEX
10'-9" x 12'-0"
PORCH
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
12'-9" x 14'-0" PRIMARY
BATH
BEDROOM 2
11'-0" x 11'-10"
BEDROOM 3
13'-6" x 11'-0"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
LOFT/ OPT.
BEDROOM 5
11'-7" x 13'-0" 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 3 SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
1095 SQ. FT.
1141 SQ. FT.
2236 SQ. FT.
420 SQ. FT.
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 3 BUNGALOW FLOOR PLANS
A26
435
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
3 :12 3 :12
VALLEY
RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE
3 :12
3 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY RIDGE VALLEY
4 :12 4 :12 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
BUNGALOW ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 3 BUNGALOW ROOF PLAN
A27
436
437
15'-0" 53'-0"
32'-0" 5'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
40'-0" 73'-0"
2-BAY GARAGE
20'-1" x 20'-1"
KITCHEN
NOOK
11'-1" x 11'-1"
FAMILY
15'-6" x 13'-7"
BEDROOM 4 ENTRY 11'-7" x 10'-6"
BATH 3
PANTRY
UP
FLEX
10'-9" x 12'-0"
PORCH
PRIMARY
BEDROOM
12'-9" x 14'-0" PRIMARY
BATH
BEDROOM 2
11'-0" x 11'-10"
BEDROOM 3
13'-6" x 11'-0"
LNDY
BATH 2
DN
LINEN
WALK-IN
CLOSET
LOFT/ OPT.
BEDROOM 5
11'-7" x 13'-0" 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 3 SQUARE FOOTAGES
FIRST FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
TOTAL LIVING
2-BAY GARAGE
1095 SQ. FT.
1141 SQ. FT.
2236 SQ. FT.
420 SQ. FT.
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 3 FARMHOUSE FLOOR PLANS
A29
438
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
5 :12
VALLEY
RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE
3 :12
3 :12
VALLEY
VALLEY
VALLEY
3 :12
7 :12 7 :12 399.203 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA
February 28, 2024
FARMHOUSE ROOF PLAN
0 1' 2' 3' 4' 8'
PLAN 3 FARMHOUSE ROOF PLAN
A30
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
Minutes of the Regular Joint Meeting of the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency and Special Meeting of the Oakley Public Financing Authority held
March 22, 2022
1) OPENING MATTERS
1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency and Special Meeting of the Oakley Public Financing Authority Mayor Randy Pope called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. in the Oakley City Council Chamber located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California. Vice Mayor Aaron Meadows and Councilmembers Anissa Williams, George Fuller and Sue Higgins were in attendance.
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Mayor Pope led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
1.3 Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District Board Update (Michael Krieg, President)
Michael Krieg, President of the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District provided an overview of the District and its status. He discussed the budget, reserves, financial ratings, rodent and mosquito issues to watch, a possible future parking structure at the District site to help accommodate its fleet, technology advancements to allow field technicians to report in real time, and use and placement of mosquito fish.
Mayor Pope thanked him for the update.
2) PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
3) CONSENT CALENDAR
3.1 Approve Minutes from the Regular Joint City Council/City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency/Public Financing Authority Meeting held March 8, 2022 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk)
3.2 Approve Minutes from the Special Meeting of the Oakley City Council held March 10, 2022 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk)
446
Council. He encouraged anyone opposed to call or write a letter to our representatives because they are steamrolling us. He mentioned the government definition of affordable housing is different, like apples and oranges, than what they may call affordable such as a working family being able to afford a home. He mentioned this is another reason that splitting the City into districts is a bad idea; they just saw a conflict and they are not even in district yet. He commented that for criteria they need sites close to transit, grocery stores, hospitals, services and schools. He mentioned Oakley doesn’t fit that and he believes ABAG is wrong and the City needs to do everything in their power to correct their error. He mentioned as Councilmember Fuller indicated, the sites need to be close to grocery stores and other things. He mentioned sometimes lower-income folks need transportation and sites need to be close to bus routes or BART. He mentioned more affordable housing near BART in Antioch would be good. He shared that Antioch has a huge development on the other side of Hwy160 and if services are going in around that area, he would like to consider sites nearby in Oakley so their residents can access those services. He mentioned he does not people in a desert of services. He expressed he is not in favor of a 30% buffer at the front end; he prefers the minimum to satisfy the law while not encouraging what he thinks is a mistake which is building affordable housing where people can’t survive. He mentioned if they need to do 30 units per acre do that and if they do 80%, that is even more reason that the City has no control. He shared he likes Councilmember Higgins’ idea of River Oaks Crossing or the northwest side. He mentioned the area was once considered for big-box commercial but would need more residents to support commercial there. He added that many sites in the City are infrastructure deserts. He commented that storm drains and sewer are expensive to put in and staff mentioned a 50-unit project could not afford to put it in, but perhaps a 300-unit project could afford to put it in to benefit everyone else around them to hook in. He requested staff look to areas of the City where economic development can tap into the development and get something positive out of it.
Mr. Strelo commented there is a minimum and maximum of 1/2 acre to 10 acres that should be looked at and staff feels that 1-5 acres is most viable.
Mayor Pope expressed they don’t want another Carol Lane.
Mr. Strelo commented there has been enough input from the Council over the years that they don’t want another project in Oakley like that again.
Mayor Pope called for recess at 9:33 p.m.
The City Council reconvened at 9:43.
7.2 2092 Oakley Road Preliminary General Plan Amendment (PA 08-21) - Work Session to discuss the merits of a potential project to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation of an approximately 9.9-acre site from Commercial (CO) to Multi-Family Residential, Low Density (ML) (Ariana Ruiz, Planning Technician) 447
Planning Technician Ariana Ruiz presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation.
Applicant Dan Cosgrove, Managing Partner of this parcel and owner of the building La Michoacan Bakery operates from and previously owned a parcel next to it. He shared he is the CEO of Mercantile Systems and he has an understanding of commercial property in Oakley. He mentioned after analysis of the property with its current zoning for commercial, it is not financially viable and that is the reason for their proposal.
Ralph Strauss with SDG architects referred to a slide on the PowerPoint. He explained that the site has some unique challenges with circulation, access and visibility and they cannot make it work for commercial. He mentioned they have studied a wide variety of commercial solutions for the site, none of which has probability and they looked at other options for a variety of solutions. He mentioned this housing is affordable by design, affordable being different from the discussion this evening. He mentioned the residential will support surrounding commercial and there will be pedestrian links to Main and to Oakley Road for access. He shared that all 3 designs have 2 car garages and additional parking, with small backyards.
Owen Poole commented they are looking for direction. He shared many years ago he was involved in the Holly Creek Development and spent time with Virgil Calisesi who owned the property next to it and it was always meant to be part of the housing development but the deal never got done. He discussed the proximity to the park, circulation, median in the middle, right in, right out have made it difficult to make it commercially viable.
Public Comments
Mary Roney mentioned she was going to ask if any of the homes meet affordable housing discussed earlier, but her question was answered. She inquired if affordable allows 30 people per acre.
Mayor Pope clarified it is 30 units per acre.
Ms. Roney inquired since they don’t meet the requirements if they can request for a percentage or number of units to fall into the low-income requirements as Councilmember Williams suggested earlier.
Marilyn Tiernan was called upon but was not present.
Mayor Pope mentioned the Council received written comments from Mr. Bailey and he moved to deliberation.
Mayor Pope requested the location slide showing the project site be displayed. 448
Councilmember Williams commented that they mentioned the site is not commercially viable. She inquired how long they have been marketing it. She mentioned in general, she doesn’t like rezoning commercial to residential.
The applicant mentioned it has been 3 years.
Councilmember Williams mentioned affordable means different things. She inquired what the houses will go for.
The applicant shared they are thinking $600k.
Councilmember Williams inquired if they would be open to a percentage being actual affordable housing.
The applicant responded they are open to discuss anything.
Councilmember Higgins inquired how they could do a right in, right out without crashing.
Mayor Pope explained it would be west bound in, west bound out. He mentioned staff could determine if a light is needed at the intersection or if a turn lane would be needed or desirable.
Councilmember Higgins commented in Brentwood there is a neighborhood where there are 6 homes in a court and it is unsafe with one-way streets. She inquired if this would be the same.
The architect responded there are two-way streets with full driveway aprons with two driveway parking spaces.
Councilmember Higgins inquired if the driveway is big enough for RVs and boats.
The architect responded they are not.
Councilmember Higgins inquired if there are any single-story homes.
The architect explained the homes are not designed yet, but they are able to provide more homes if they build up.
Vice Mayor Meadows mentioned the applicant quoted a price estimate but he assumes he will be selling to a builder.
The applicant responded he is not sure yet.
Vice Mayor Meadows commented he is not keen on all three plans, but is leaning toward Plan A. He mentioned he understands the constraints on the site for commercial and that it is not viable for that purpose.
449
Mayor Pope commented a number of these projects have come forward and he only recalls one that was approved on the other side of Raley’s. He mentioned although the applicant didn’t make the argument, he sees that this project would provide customers for the commercial nearby so there is economic incentive. He shared he is empathetic to the constraints of the site, but generally, he looks for the biggest benefits to the residents of the City and residents of the project. He inquired if they can make it a private, gated community with private roads. He requested clarification which area is the alley and which is the path.
The architect explained where they were and where the access paths are located.
Mayor Pope commented he likes the court concept, but they must be careful how they execute it.
Mayor Pope commented they have the direction to look into housing to help meet the low-income RHNA requirement.
Mayor Pope mentioned they are looking to them for ideas to benefit the City; the City would be giving away possible sales tax revenue, services, commercial, etc.
Mr. Poole commented what the City doesn’t want is a substandard commercial site because it will always be struggling and that is why they are here. He mentioned any of the 3 plans will be strong and there will be an HOA so there will be no boats or RVs on the properties, with the properly managed with the right HOA, they will get Councilmember Williams’ children living here and his children living here. He mentioned it is a unique, upscale development, a young, urban type of site. He mentioned they can get some young people in that don’t leave town.
Mayor Pope inquired if there is an amenity that isn’t present, something attractive to the project, another project multi-generational park, something unique. He mentioned he would look for something special.
Councilmember Fuller commented he likes the design and the urban, smaller houses that may be attractive for young families. He mentioned he is not inclined to give up a commercial site, the City is losing light industrial and commercial, one of the reasons the City incorporated, and it is turning into residential.
Mr. Poole mentioned there is a similar development in downtown Pleasant Hill where there is a very good relationship between the housing and nearby commercial.
Councilmember Higgins commented there are homes near the Jack-in-the-Box in Brentwood by Sand Creek Road that are exactly this that have young families with no kids, but dogs. There they have issues with nowhere to walk the dogs, but here there would be sidewalks. She mentioned the Council approved townhomes for the Cypress 450
area, but she is not sure if they were ever built, modeled after what was built in Pleasant Hill near Gregory Lane.
Vice Mayor Meadows shared there was a study about 2 years ago that indicated the City is oversaturated in commercial zoning. He agreed with Mr. Poole that this site is not a good commercial site. He mentioned there will be issues with ingress and egress for homes; if they have it for commercial, it will kill a commercial project. He mentioned there is no curb on Main, there is a current elevation issue, and there is a cell tower on the site that might be able to be moved. He mentioned he thinks everyone knows he does not want to lose commercial, but this site is not viable for commercial.
Mayor Pope mentioned that Randi Adler put in public comment for item 2.0 and was in a discussion with Police during that time so he would like to provide her the opportunity to speak.
Randi Adler thanked the Council for its support for her with her recent hip replacement.
She commented she has an issue with Police. She shared her daughter is abused by her boyfriend and Officer England has shown he doesn’t care and told her it is her (Ms.
Adler’s) fault. She mentioned some officers should not be officers or they should be retrained to actually care about what is going on in their communities. She mentioned women and some men are in relationships where they are being abused and have no way out. She shared her daughter’s boyfriend has been looking online for an AK-47 to try and kill them. She expressed she needs help and she is going to get a restraining order, but it is just a piece of paper and she hopes they don’t show up dead. 8) ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
Respectively Submitted,
Libby Vreonis
City Clerk
451
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: February 6, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Ken Strelo, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03- 22, FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22) – Request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Final Development Plan, Tentative Map, and Design Review for a 9.99 acre, 83 unit single family residential subdivision project. APN 037-110-031.
Summary
This is an application by Owen Poole (“Applicant”) requesting approval of 1) a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to redesignate 9.99 acres from Commercial (CO) to Residential Medium (RM); 2) a Rezone (RZ 03-22) of 9.99 acres from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District; 3) a Final Development Plan (FDP 02-22) for development of the 9.99 acres site; 4) a Tentative Map (TM 04-22) to subdivide 9.99 acres into 83 single family residential lots, additional on-site parking, a toddler park, community gathering areas, and other improvements; and 5) a Design Review (DR 07-22) for floor plans and architecture of three homes types with three elevations and three color schemes, and landscaping and other improvements throughout the project (“Project”). This project includes compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed. The site is located at 2092 Oakley Road and is zoned C (General Commercial) District. APN 037-110-031.
Note: The Planning Commission will serve as an advisory role to the City Council on this application.
Background
GENERAL PLAN
Existing Land Use Designation
• Commercial (“CO”) – The CO designation allows for a broad range of commercial uses typically found adjacent to residential neighborhoods, downtowns, and freeways.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
Planning Commission
452
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 2 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Proposed Land Use Designation
• Residential Medium (“RM”) – The RM designation provides for more affordable, small lot development and to increase the availability of rental or entry-level housing.
ZONING
Current Zoning District
• C (General Commercial) District – The purpose of the C District is to create and maintain major commercial centers accommodating a broad range of commercial uses (e.g., office, retail, and personal services) of community-wide or regional significance typically found adjacent to or along major travel corridors, such as Main Street, O’Hara Avenue, Laurel Avenue and Empire Avenue.
Proposed Zoning District
• P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District – The purpose of the P-1 District is to allow diversification in the relationship of various uses, buildings, structures, lot sizes and open spaces, ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, and to ensure substantial compliance with the General Plan and the intent of the Municipal Code in requiring adequate standards necessary to satisfy the requirements of the public health, safety and general welfare.
SITE CONDITIONS AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
The subject property is a
rectangular shaped site with an
approximately 625-foot frontage
along Oakley Road, and an
approximately 120-foot frontage
along Main Street in the
northeast corner (See Figure 1.
Aerial of Project Site).
The property has two existing
single-family residences: one
along Oakley Road, and another
near the existing wireless
communication facility.
There is also an existing mobile
home community known as the
Eagle City Mobile Home Park
located to the north and west of
Figure 1. Aerial of Project Site
453
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 3 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us the site. These parcels are designated Residential Mobile Home (“RMH”) within Oakley’s General Plan. The parcels to the southwest contain existing single-family residences and are designated as Residential Medium (“RM”). Directly to the east of the site are the Valvoline Instant Oil Change service station and the 7-11 gas station.
PRELIMINARY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT WORK SESSION
On March 22, 2022, the City Council held a Preliminary General Plan Amendment Work Session (Planning Application PA 0-21) to discuss the merits of this potential project. The applicant presented three separate concepts for the site to help visualize how a project under the Residential Medium (“RM”) designation may look.
After receiving Staff’s Report and comments from the applicant, the City Council opened the Work Session up for public comments and followed with their own questions and comments to the Applicant. Feedback from the City Council ranged from questions on the commercial viability of the site to potential amenities in a future project. An excerpt from the adopted minutes is included as an attachment to this Staff Report.
Project Description
The proposed project would include amending the General Plan Land Use Designation of an underutilized commercial site currently occupied by two homes and a vineyard to a fully developed single-family residential subdivision operated by a homeowner’s association. Other related entitlements associated with this application include a Rezone, Final Development Plan, Tentative Map, and Design Review. All homes are proposed as two-story structures with front porches loaded onto landscaped pedestrian pathways and rear garages loaded onto the neighborhood’s streets. Fourteen of the homes are proposed to have their porches front onto Oakley Road. Those home’s garages would also be at the rear of the homes and accessed from the interior street. Each of the proposed entitlements is further described in the following subsections:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA 01-22)
The project includes a request to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation on the 9.99-acre site from Commercial (“CO”) to Residential Medium (“RM”). The RM designation allows for single family and multi-family residential construction at a density between 5.5 and 9.6 dwelling units per gross acre. The project is proposed at 8.3 dwelling units per gross acre. Approval of this General Plan Amendment allows the other associated entitlements to be consistent with the underlying General Plan Land Use Designation. The requested General Plan Amendment and associated project entitlements may be simultaneously analyzed and considered for approval as one project application.
454
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 4 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us REZONE (RZ 03-22)
The project application includes a request for approval of a Rezone from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District that is tied to the proposed Final Development Plan and Tentative Map. The proposed P-1 District would allow for the unique project design that includes private, HOA-maintained road, rear garages, and pedestrian oriented fronts to the homes. A P-1 District has no impact on the allowable density of the underlying General Plan Land Use Designation. Table 1 provides a summary of the P-1 District’s proposed Development Regulations.
Table 1. P-1 District’s Proposed Development Regulations Min. Lot Size
(sf.)
Front Yard
Setback (ft.)
Side Yard
Setback (ft.)
Corner Side Yard
Setback (ft.)
Rear Yard
Setback (ft.)
Project’s
P-1 District 2,920 15 4
7 (entry way)
4 (parking areas)
13 (interior roads)
5 FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (FDP 02-22)
A Final Development Plan (“FDP”) is a component of a P-1 District. The applicant is choosing to combine the FDP application with the Rezone application, which is allowed per the “Planned Unit Development (P-1)” section of the Oakley Municipal Code (Section
9.1.1002). The FDP includes the information provided on the Vesting Tentative Map and its related plans, as well as other information such as details on housing or elevations and heights of non-residential buildings. When FDPs are processed after a P-1 District is formed, the P-1 District will usually include a Preliminary Development Plan; however, an applicant may submit a FDP with a P-1 District rezone application so that it may be considered in conjunction with the rest of the project entitlements, such as what has occurred with this application. The proposed FDP will approve the general layout design, number of lots, types of residential structures, etc. Any requested change to the approved FDP would be reviewed by the Planning Commission/City Council where that body would determine whether the change is substantial enough to warrant a public hearing in order to further review the request.
TENTATIVE MAP (TM 04-22)
The proposed project would result in the subdivision of approximately 9.99 acres into a new single-family residential subdivision of 83 lots, including additional on-site parking, a toddler park, and community gathering areas. Other improvements will include frontage dedication and improvements along Oakley Road, internal private street network, pedestrian access to the front porches of the interior lots, and stormwater detention/bioretention areas. The development will be managed and maintained by a homeowner’s association; however, due to the proximity to Oakley Road and Empire Avenue intersection, it will not include vehicle gates at the entry. As proposed, the 455
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 5 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us gross density (includes all area before right of way dedication, parks, landscaping, etc.) is 8.3 dwelling units per gross acre (du/ga). Residential lot sizes ranging between 2,920 and 3,790 square feet (sf), and an average residential lot size of 2,986 sf. Most lots have a 40-foot wide frontage.
Access, Circulation and Parking
Access to the neighborhood streets would by a main entrance off of Oakley Road (See Figure 2. Rendering of Neighborhood Entrance). A secondary, 21-foot wide emergency vehicle access (“EVA”) will connect to Main Street in the northwest corner of the project. The EVA would be blocked to vehicular traffic by removable bollards; however, it will be open to pedestrians and connect direct to Main Street and connect indirectly to Main Street further to the north via an ADA accessible pedestrian pathway.
The internal street network is laid out in a grid pattern with on-street. A total of 120 onstreet parking spaces are proposed as 90-degree spaces along the two east/westoriented streets, and the north/south oriented street adjacent to the commercial properties to the east. Parallel parking along other portions of those and the other streets would be prohibited by the HOA. All internal streets provide access to the twocar garages located at the rear of the homes. Off-street parking is limited to garages as there is not sufficient private driveway length to accommodate vehicle parking.
Oakley Road/Main Street Dedication and Improvements
The project is conditioned to dedicate approximately 20 additional feet of right of way along the Oakley Road property line for a total right of way half-width of 55 feet.
Improvements within that area would include additional street pavement, new curb and gutter, 6.5 feet of new landscaping, and 6.5 feet of sidewalk. The back of sidewalk would align with the future front property lines of the 14 lots that will front Oakley Road.
Additional right of way is not required to be dedicated along Main Street, but the Figure 2. Rendering of Neighborhood Entrance
456
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 6 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us project is conditioned to install new curb and gutter, 6.5 feet of landscaping, and 4 feet of sidewalk. The applicant would also improve the Oakley Road center median to its full width, some of which may be available for fee credits. Due to the proximity to the Oakley Road/Empire Avenue intersection, the project entry will be right in/right out only.
Proposed Landscape Plans
The proposed landscape plans are included as Sheets L-1.1 through L-12. The information on those plans provides an Illustrative Overall Plan that shows all proposed tree locations and landscaped areas overlaid onto an aerial of the site and surrounding properties, and a Preliminary Landscape Plan that calls out different areas on the site plan and acts as a key for the other included details. Other sheets provide Wall and Fence Plan and Details, Typical House Cluster Enlargement, Open Space Enlargement, Parking Area Concept, Project Entry Enlargement, the Plant Palette, Site Amenities such as the playground furniture and equipment and open space structures, and construction and irrigation details.
Fencing throughout the site will consist
of 6-foot tall board on board wood
fencing. Exterior property lines shared
with the mobile home park will be
completely solid while fencing protecting
private side yards of the lots will have 1-
foot of lattice at the top. Wooden entry
gates to the private yards will match the
fencing, including the lattice top. The 14
lots that front Oakley Road will have a
low picket fence at the back of sidewalk
(See Figure 3. Low Picket Fence Along
Oakley Road). There is an existing
slatted chain link fence between a
portion of the existing commercial businesses to the east and the project site. The remaining portion of that boundary has no fencing. The proposed plans do not include any additional fencing or walls between the existing commercial properties to the east and the proposed development. Staff have conditioned the PC Resolution to require the applicant to comply with Oakley’s Design Standards by installing an 8- foot tall sound wall consistent with Oakley’s acceptable design and materials along this boundary. The condition will also require the plans be revised to show the wall location and design prior to presentation to the City Council for final project determination.
One component related to the site landscaping is the Arborist Report that identifies all existing trees on site as well as if any are classified as “Protected Trees” pursuant to the City’s Heritage and Protected Trees ordinance (Oakley Municipal Code Figure 3. Low Picket Fence Along Oakley Road
457
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 7 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Section 9.1.1120). The project’s arborist report was prepared by Atlas Tree Service and is dated September 15, 2022. In summary, the report identified 16 living trees on the property, none of which classified as “Protected Trees;” however, there are two non-native pine trees located near the border of the site with Main Street. The project applicant has shown these two trees as remaining as part of the project design.
DESIGN REVIEW (DR 07-22)
As part of the Design Review application, the applicant is proposing house floor plans, architecture, color and material schemes, landscaping plans (including conceptual street tree layout and park equipment), and fence plans. Since the landscaping was covered in the Tentative Map project description, this section will focus on the homes.
There are three different floor plans ranging from 1,848 sf. to 2,236 sf. of livable area.
All plans are two story homes with two-car garages. Table 2 provides a summary of the proposed floor plans.
Table 2. Summary of Proposed Floor Plans
Livable Area
SF
1st Story / 2nd
Story SF Bedrooms Bathrooms Garage SF/cars
Plan 1 1,848 892 / 956 4 bedrooms 3 429 / 2
Plan 2 2,083 1,006 / 1,077 4 bedrooms 3 441 / 2
Plan 3 2,236 1,095 / 1,141 5 bedrooms
or 4 w/ opt. loft 3 420 / 2
In addition to the three floor plans are three architectural styles, referred to as Spanish, Farmhouse, and Bungalow. Each of the three architectural styles has three color and material themes tied specifically to that style. Figure 4 shows the conceptual streetscape at the project entry.
Figure 4. Conceptual Streetscape at the Project Entry
458
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 8 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Environmental Review
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT COMPLIANCE
An Initial Study (“IS”) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) have been prepared for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). Raney Planning and Management conducted the CEQA analysis survey on behalf of the City of Oakley. The Notice of Intent (“NOI”) to Adopt an MND and IS was circulated for public review and comment from November 16, 2023 to December 18, 2023. It was filed with the County Clerk and Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”), distributed to over 60 public agencies and parties requesting such notice, and posted in the same manner as a Notice of Public hearing, which is at locations throughout the City and at the project site. The NOI provided a summary of the project as well as methods to access the IS/MND for review and comment. No comments were received by the City within the commenting period for the NOI, nor were any comment letters received after the commenting period for the NOI.
Analysis in the IS found eight (8) of the 21 impact categories require mitigation to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. All other 13 impact categories were found to have either no impacts or less than significant impacts. A summary of the mitigation measures can be found in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, included as Exhibit “A” to the Proposed Resolution attached to this Staff Report.
Since the Planning Commission is making recommendations to the City Council on the entitlements associated with this application, they will also make a recommendation for adoption of the MND to the City Council. Recommendation for adoption of the MND is included in the proposed resolution for recommendation for approval of the other entitlements associated with the project. The NOI and IS/MND are included as attachments to this Staff Report.
Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan This project is subject to the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (“HCP/NCCP” or “HCP Plan”). Projects that are subject to the HCP Plan are required to submit a Planning Survey Report (“PSR”) as part of the project application. The contents of the PSR help guide the project through compliance with both the California and Federal Endangered Species Act by assuming presence of certain plant and animal species and requiring additional surveys to be done prior to any ground disturbance. In addition, whether species are found or not, the project must pay development impact fees for each acre, or fraction thereof, of disturbed land not already considered “urban” under the HCP Plan. Those development impact fees are used to help create, install, and maintain habitat outside of the Urban Limit Line, as well as administer the HCP Plan. The project would contribute 459
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL 9 | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us $198,520.38 to the HCP/NCCP program under the impact fees current as of the date of this staff report.
Analysis
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
Requests for amendments to the underlying General Plan land use designation on a property should be considered with respect to surrounding uses and their respective land use designations. The 9.99-acre project site is bordered on the west and north by an existing residential mobile home park to the south by Oakley Road with existing residential uses and a vacant Commercially designated site beyond, and to the east by a gas station with convenience store and drive-through oil change facility. Commercial adjacent to residential is common and in most cases a commercially designated area will eventually border a residentially designated area.
With proper design the two land uses can co-exist adjacent to each other.
Amending the General Plan Land Use designation to Residential Medium (“RM”) would make the property more consistent with surrounding residential uses, but less consistent with the adjacent commercial uses. However, since this property is not located on a major arterial roadway, the amendment will allow for additional infill housing that will be located near public transit and existing commercial uses. The project design and conditions of approval will minimize the potential issues that could arise with residential and commercial adjacent to teach other.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment.
REZONE/FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
When making a recommendation to the City Council on a rezone to P-1 District and Final Development Plan, the Planning Commission shall be satisfied that the following are true (summarized from OMC section 9.1.1002):
• The applicant intends to start construction within two years from the effective date of the zoning change;
• The development is consistent with the General Plan;
• If residential, it has sustained desirability and stability, and is in harmony with the character of surrounding neighborhoods; and
• The development of a harmonious, integrated plan justifies exceptions from the normal application of the OMC.
460
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 10
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us The Applicant has stated they are unsure if they will function as developer or sell the property or rights to develop the property; however, construction within two years is reasonable with either option, depending on market conditions. The density and type of development is consistent with the General Plan, and the project integrates pedestrian connectivity to Main Street and nearby commercial developments. Vehicular transportation will have almost immediate access to major arterials such as Empire Avenue and Main Street. The type of development is expected to be desirable in that it includes a variety of homes sizes on smaller lots with an HOA which can appeal to those less interested in large private yards that require maintenance and that may value nearby access to public transportation and walkable amenities. The other HOA amenities such as the park and public gathering areas are additional attractions for the project. The development will be a harmonious and integrated plan that includes exceptions from the normal application of the Oakley Municipal Code due to the number and size of amenities usually found in larger subdivisions, such as a park, public gathering areas. The P-1 District is justified to allow for project-specific development regulations in order to design a feasible project within the allowable range of the General Plan Land Use Designation of RM.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of the proposed Rezone and Final Development Plan applications.
TENTATIVE MAP
The Tentative Map (“TM”) has been reviewed against all applicable codes including the Subdivision Map Act, General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance. The TM’s gross density (approximately 8.3 du/ga) falls within the gross density range of the Residential Low (RM) General Plan Land Use Designation of 5.5-9.6 du/ga. The TM is tied to a P-1 District, which has proposed project-specific development regulations, such as required yard setbacks and minimum lot sizes.
The site is physically suitable for the project in that it is accessible, not physically constrained other than the reduction in net developable acres due to frontage right of way dedication, onsite stormwater detention and treatment, in-tract park, and in-tract public gathering areas is similar to surrounding residentially developed projects, and it is also able to accommodate the proposed density of development in a manner consistent with the underlying land use designation of RM. The subdivision is not expected to result in any serious public health problems. Public improvements are proposed and conditioned to occur as a result of the subdivision, which is a benefit to the public and surrounding residents and property owners of the vicinity. One such improvement will be the dedication and frontage improvements along Oakley Road, which currently lacks any sort of curb, gutter, or sidewalk for pedestrian or bicycle safety.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of the proposed Vesting Tentative Map application.
461
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 11
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us
DESIGN REVIEW
Analysis for Design Review refers to the Standards for Review as laid out in OMC section 9.1.1604(f), which focuses on site planning, architecture, landscaping and site elements, and streetscapes. With these standards in mind, the proposed plans were analyzed for consistency with the adopted City of Oakley Residential Guidelines (“Guidelines”).
Neighborhood Layout and Design
The project has been designed so that all streets will function as residential streets that provide access to the rear garages for each home. This is a unique and new design for development in Oakley and will add to the product mix available to first-time homebuyers and those looking to move into a newer or larger home that does not require as much outdoor space maintenance while still including outdoor spaces such as the proposed park and public gathering areas. Also, the front doors will be accessible by pedestrian walkways that run through landscaped corridors. The nearby public transportation on Main Street and commercial shopping center nearly adjacent to the project or within ½ mile will provide additional amenities to residents without the need to drive to the location.
Residential Siting and Lot Design
The applicant has designed the homes so that nearly every lot has the same setback to the respective garage and porch area. This is typically not ideal when homes are plotted on public streets and include larger yard spaces; however, this is a unique project given the attention to pedestrian paseos running along the front of the homes.
Figure 5 shows the illustration of the view from one of the paseos to the entry of the pedestrian pathway connections to the front of the homes.
Building mass is an element of lot siting and
design and can affect the aesthetics of the
overall neighborhood. For the proposed
project, changes in roof materials and design
among the same floor plan assist in giving
the overall neighborhood more visual variety.
Some changes are to the main roof line,
while others focus on the projecting
elements such as porches.
Two common Oakley Design Guidelines look for new single family residential to achieve a minimum of 20% single-story homes and that at least 50% of all corner lots be singlestory homes, and another is to maintain at least a 15-foot setback between adjacent second story elements. Often with P-1 District developments the lot sizes are reduced Figure 5. Paseo and Pedestrian Pathway
462
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 12
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us in both size and width which leads to architects needing to design a two-story home in order to achieve the desirable square footage of the market in a manner that meets the developer’s criteria as well. A single-story home is more feasible when lots are closer to 5,000 square feet or more, leaving room for the square footage of the home to take up a larger footprint. For the density and lot size of this project, single-story homes are not feasible.
Architectural Character
The architectural character and design of the proposed homes meets several of the design guidelines. There is variation in materials between architectural styles, such as roofing, veneer, and siding. The three color schemes for each architectural style complement each other while allowing for uniqueness to any given home with the eyesight of another. There are no options for different garage doors or garage door windows, as proposed.
Areas for small improvements and better implementation of the design guidelines are summarized below and have been included as conditions of approval for the applicant to integrate into the plans prior to City Council consideration of the project:
• Exterior lighting specific to each architectural type and/or theme lighting for pedestrian paseo areas to be shown on the proposed elevations; • Integration of false shutters on the front and rear elevations as feasible and in tune with the respective architectural styles;
• The use of different garage door designs for each architectural style including integration of garage windows, if feasible.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission Recommend City Council approval of the proposed Design Review application.
Findings
Draft findings can be found in the proposed resolution.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
Approval of this application would be consistent with the goals in the section of the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+ entitled, “Community and Economic Development Goal”.
Reviewing applications for compliance with Oakley’s development standards ensures strategic and thoughtful growth.
463
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 13
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Fiscal Impact
The approval of these entitlements will not impact the General Fund. This is a developer funded account. All Staff time and City of Oakley generated materials are charged to the account and paid for by the developer.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the proposed resolution recommending the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project titled, “The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03-22, FDP 02-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22)” as conditioned.
Attachments
1. Vicinity Map
2. Notice of Public Hearing
3. City Council Minutes from March 22, 2022 - Excerpt of Project’s Preliminary General Plan Amendment Work Session (Item 7.2)
4. Applicant’s Plans
5. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
6. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
7. Proposed Resolution with Exhibit “A” Mitigation Monitoring Program 464
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the
City of Oakley Planning Commission
held February 6, 2024
1) OPENING MATTERS
1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley Planning Commission Chair Oleksii Chuiko called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm in the Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California. Vice Chair Diego Verduzco and Commissioners Leonard Price, Jimmy Ramirez and Jeanne Krieg were present.
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Commissioner Price led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2) PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
3) CONSENT CALENDAR
3.1 Approve Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting held January 16, 2024 (Kim Snodgrass, Deputy City Clerk)
It was moved by Vice Chair Verduzco and seconded by Commissioner Krieg to approve the minutes. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0) 4) PUBLIC HEARINGS
4.1 The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision 9634 (GPA 01-22, RZ 03-22, FDP 01-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22) Request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Final Development Plan, Tentative Map, and Design Review for a 9.99 acre, 83 unit single family residential subdivision project. APN 037-110- 031. (Ken Strelo, Planning Manager)
California Environmental Quality Act determination: Recommend that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration finding the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
465
Planning Manager Ken Strelo presented a summary of the project and mentioned that the agenda states Negative Declaration, it should be a Mitigated Negative Declaration, there is a small technical difference between those two types of documents.
Applicant Ralph Strauss with SDG Architects mentioned that the property owner Dan Cosgrove is here as well as Owen Poole who is helping with the entitlement. He thanked staff for their work and provided a PowerPoint presentation.
Commissioner Ramirez thanked Mr. Strauss for his presentation and mentioned he appreciates the variety of the homes, he mentioned he is curious about the onsite amenities and inquired how the firm considered a toddler park and asked If he could speak to the trailer park and the elderly folks nearby and inquired if there had been any conversation about opening up the amenities for those folks to enjoy.
Mr. Strauss mentioned that the common areas have trellises, seating areas and gathering areas, the toddler park will have typical amenities for that age group so kids can run wild in one and people can have more peaceful enjoyment in the other. He mentioned that because it is a privately maintained neighborhood, there wasn’t discussion about opening it up but there is nothing preventing someone from coming in and enjoying the park.
Commissioner Krieg thanked Mr. Strauss for the presentation and mentioned he answered all of her questions.
Mr. Strauss mentioned that the property owner is here if there are any questions he could answer.
Chair Chuiko opened the Public Hearing and mentioned since there are no public comments, he will close the Public Hearing and call for deliberations.
Mr. Chuiko mentioned that when it comes to rezoning, they take it very seriously, especially going from commercial to residential because as a community, they would like to see more businesses in Oakley; however as was pointed out, this is a unique project, it’s not an ideal location for commercial zoning so with all of the benefits for the local businesses having a community next door, it’s a huge win as well as the access to public transit.
It was moved by Commissioner Price and seconded by Commissioner Krieg to approve item 4.1. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0)
4.2 3370 Main Street Remodel Design Review (DR 09-23) (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner)
California Environmental Quality Act determination: Find the project is exempt under the Class One categorical exemption for existing facilities (14 Cal. Code Regs./CEQA Guideline § 15301)
Associate Planner Evan Gorman presented the staff report.
Applicant Lance Crannell with SDG Architects mentioned the impetus for this project was the City’s facade improvement program, which started the conversation to see how this property can be improved. He mentioned that the bakery may stay, it is an existing 466
running business, and they do not have any firm plans to change that use just yet, but it would benefit from an improved façade.
Chair Chuiko asked Mr. Crannell if he could elaborate on the occupancy.
Mr. Crannell mentioned that Suite B is currently the bakery and that will continue to be a bakery for the foreseeable future, the spaces in the back are separated in a way that they could be used as office executive suites or some office use, it’s designed as a shell so it can be tenant improved to fit the needs of whatever allowable use is allowed for that space.
Chair Chuiko asked if the current tenant will remain.
Mr. Crannell confirmed that as of right now, they will remain.
Chair Chuiko asked if the second unit is vacant.
Mr. Crannell confirmed it is currently vacant.
Chair Chuiko inquired if when the structure in between the buildings is removed, there will be clear access to the unit.
Mr. Crannell confirmed the courtyard will be an amenity to benefit both suites.
Commissioner Ramires asked if the applicant could talk about how they came to the design and did they consider potentially making the frontage a place for customers to sit down.
Mr. Crannell responded that given the size of the bakery and all of the baking equipment, it takes up a big foot print within the floor plan itself, so they are working with a limited floor plan, they designed it in such a way that the facade was more inviting to the neighbors, the interior is in pre-design to do a couple of different uses, but considering the bakery is there now, they may stay there for the foreseeable future.
Given that there is a point of sale and concessions, it does not leave too much for seating within that footprint and just outside that footprint is the public right of way, so they do not have any discretion over that.
Chair Chuiko opened the Public Hearing and mentioned that since there are no comments, he will close the Public Hearing and call for deliberations.
It was moved by Vice Chair Verduzco and seconded by Commissioner Krieg to approve item 4.2. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0)
4.3 Tu Jalisco Restaurant Full Alcoholic Service (CUP 05-23) (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner)
California Environmental Quality Act determination: Find the project is exempt under the Class One categorical exemption for existing facilities (14 Cal. Code Regs./CEQA Guideline § 15301)
Associate Planner Evan Gorman presented the staff report. 467
Commissioner Ramirez asked if the applicant could share what it would mean for his business to have this Conditional Use Permit.
The owner, Mr. Saldana, responded he would have more sales and improved service.
Commissioner Price mentioned that since this is an existing restaurant and they are not talking about opening a new bar, he would like to speak in favor of granting this.
Mr. Chuiko opened the Public Hearing and mentioned since there are no public comments, he would close the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Price stated that there are enough stand alone bars, this is not establishing a new bar, just adding to one that is already there.
It was moved by Commissioner Price and seconded by Commissioner Ramirez to approve item 4.3. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0) 5) REGULAR CALENDAR
None
6) REPORTS
6.1 Reports from Staff Members
Mr. Strelo reported the next scheduled Planning Commission Meeting will be Tuesday March 5th at 6:30pm.
6.2 OAKLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
(a) Reports from Commission Members
Commissioner Price reported the last Transplan meeting was cancelled; there is a meeting scheduled for Thursday so he should have a report at the next meeting. (b) Requests for Future Agendas
Commissioner Ramirez mentioned that after looking at some of the projects, he looked at Oakley’s parks and mentioned Oakley only has four basketball courts, he didn’t see any volleyball courts, and as these development projects come across, he would love to have the Parks and Recreation department come share with them the trials, tribulations, where they are lacking, and who they are not designing parks for if that’s possible.
Chair Chuiko thanked Commissioner Ramirez for the request and mentioned that if they are bringing something forward as a future agenda item, Commissioners should have a consensus and asked if the Commissioners would like to have this on a future agenda.
There was a consensus to have this item on a future agenda. 7) WORK SESSIONS
None
468
8) ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m.
Respectively Submitted,
Kim Snodgrass
Deputy City Clerk
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Contact Person and Phone Number: Ken Strelo, Planning Manager [email protected]
(925) 625-7000
Project Location: 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA 94561
Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 037-110-031
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: John D’Ambrosio Family Trust/ Mercantile Systems, Inc.
9040 Brentwood Boulevard
Brentwood, CA 94513
Existing General Plan: Commercial (CO)
Existing Zoning: C (General Commercial) District
Project Description Summary:
The approximately 9.99-acre project site, identified by APN 037-110-031, is located at 2092 Oakley Road in the City of Oakley, California. The project site is developed with one singlefamily residence in the southern portion of the project site and one single-family residence, one ancillary shed, and one cell tower resembling a water tower in the northeast corner of the site. The remainder of the parcel is planted as a vineyard with rows of grapevines. A total of 16 trees exist on-site. An off-site gravel roadway runs along the eastern boundary of the site and provides access to the single-family residence in the northeast corner of the site.
Surrounding existing uses include a mobile home park to the north and west; a convenience store, gas station, and an oil change service shop to the east; a shopping center to the 505
southeast, across Empire Avenue; and single-family residences and agricultural land to the south, across Oakley Road. The City of Oakley General Plan designates the project site as Commercial (CO) and the site is zoned C (General Commercial) District.
Development of The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision (proposed project) would include the demolition of the two on-site existing single-family residences and one ancillary structure; removal of 14 trees; the subdivision of the project site into 83 single-family residential lots, Parcel A, and Parcel B; and the subsequent development of 83 single-family residential units, three bioretention basins, landscaping, and an internal circulation network.
The existing on-site cell tower would remain. The project would also include the off-site, northerly extension of storm drain lines within Main Street and installation of a water line tiein within Oakley Road, as well as off-site improvements to widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes.
The project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to change the land use designation for the project site from CO to Residential Medium (RM), a Rezone (RZ 03-22) to change the zoning designation for the project site from C District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District, a Final Development Plan (FDP 01-22), a Vesting Tentative Map (TM 04-22), as well as a Design Review (DR 07-22).
Declaration:
On November 16, 2023, the City of Oakley Planning Division determined that the above project will have no significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from the requirement of an Environmental Impact Report. The determination is based on the following findings:
a) The project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
b) It will not have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of longterm, environmental goals. c) It will not have significant impacts, which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
d) It will not have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
e) No substantial evidence exists that the project will have a significant negative adverse effect on the environment.
f) The proposed project is not on any of the lists enumerated under Section 65962.5 of the Government Code as related to hazardous materials.
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for review at https://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/ceqa-documents/. Written comments must be submitted no 506
later than 5:00 PM on December 18, 2023. Appeal of this determination must be made during the 30-day posting period. Notice is further given that the City of Oakley will hold public hearings to discuss the project and provide an opportunity for public comment on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and project approvals. Subsequent notices will be published which will identify the date, time, and location of public hearings.
Submit comments to:
City of Oakley
Attn: Ken Strelo, Planning Manager
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Posting period: November 16, 2023 – December 18, 2023
Initial Study Prepared By:
Ken Strelo, Planning Manager
507
City of Oakley
Planning Division
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
November 2023
Prepared by
1501 Sports Drive, Suite A, Sacramento CA 95834
Office 916.372.6100 Fax 916.419.6108
508
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
i
November 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. PROJECT SUMMARY....................................................................................................1 B. SOURCES ......................................................................................................................3 C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED..........................................6 D. DETERMINATION...........................................................................................................6 E. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION .........................................................................7 F. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................8 G. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST..................................................................................20 I. AESTHETICS. ...................................................................................................21 II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. .................................................25 III. AIR QUALITY. ...................................................................................................27 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES..............................................................................38 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. ...............................................................................44 VI. ENERGY. ..........................................................................................................48 VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.....................................................................................52 VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. ...................................................................57 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. ....................................................61 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY..............................................................68 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. ............................................................................72 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. ..................................................................................73 XIII. NOISE. ..............................................................................................................74 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING..........................................................................82 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES...........................................................................................83 XVI. RECREATION. ..................................................................................................86 XVII. TRANSPORTATION..........................................................................................87 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. ..................................................................93 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. ..............................................................95 XX. WILDFIRE..........................................................................................................98 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. .................................................99 Appendices
Appendix A – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions – CalEEMod and Road Construction Emissions Model Results
Appendix B – Planning Survey Report
Appendix C – CNDDB Search Results
Appendix D – Preliminary Arborist Report
Appendix E – Historic Evaluation
Appendix F – Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix G – Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix H – Hydrology Report
Appendix I – Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan
Appendix J – Traffic Study
509
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1 November 2023
A. PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Project Title: The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision (GPA 01-22, RZ 03-22, FDP 01-22, TM 04-22, DR 07-22)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Oakley
Planning Division
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Ken Strelo
Planning Manager
(925) 625-7000
4. Project Location: 2092 Oakley Road
Oakley, CA 94561
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs): 037-110-031
5. Project Applicant Name and Address: John D’Ambrosio Family Trust/ Mercantile Systems, Inc.
9040 Brentwood Boulevard
Brentwood, CA 94513
6. Existing General Plan Designation: Commercial (CO)
7. Proposed General Plan Designation: Residential Medium (RM)
8. Existing Zoning Designation: C (General Commercial) District
9. Proposed Zoning Designation: P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District
10. Required Approvals from Other Public Agencies: None
11. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The approximately 9.99-acre project site, identified by APN 037-110-031, is located at 2092 Oakley Road in the City of Oakley, California. The project site is developed with one singlefamily residence in the southern portion of the project site and one single-family residence, one ancillary shed, and one cell tower resembling a water tower in the northeast corner of the site. The remainder of the parcel is planted as a vineyard with rows of grapevines. A total of 16 trees exist on-site. An off-site gravel roadway runs along the eastern boundary of the site and provides access to the single-family residence in the northeast corner of the site. Surrounding existing uses include a mobile home park to the north and west; a convenience store, gas station, and an oil change service shop to the east; a shopping center to the southeast, across Empire Avenue; and single-family residences and
INITIAL STUDY
510
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2 November 2023
agricultural land to the south, across Oakley Road. The City of Oakley General Plan designates the project site as Commercial (CO) and the site is zoned C (General Commercial) District.
12. Project Description Summary:
Development of The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision (proposed project) would include the demolition of the two on-site existing single-family residences and one ancillary structure; removal of 14 trees; the subdivision of the project site into 83 single-family residential lots, Parcel A, and Parcel B; and the subsequent development of 83 singlefamily residential units, three bioretention basins, landscaping, and an internal circulation network. The existing on-site cell tower would remain. The project would also include the off-site, northerly extension of storm drain lines within Main Street and installation of a water line tie-in within Oakley Road, as well as off-site improvements to widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes. The project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 01-22) to change the land use designation for the project site from CO to Residential Medium (RM), a Rezone (RZ 03-22) to change the zoning designation for the project site from C (General Commercial) District to P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District, a Final Development Plan (FDP 01-22), a Vesting Tentative Map (TM 04-22), as well as a Design Review (DR 07-22).
13. Status of Native American Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1:
In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21080.3.1) and Senate Bill (SB) 18, a project notification letter was distributed to the chairpersons of the following tribes on June 8, 2023: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, Guidiville Indian Rancheria, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People, Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area, Nashville Enterprise Miwok-Maidu-Nishinam Tribe, North Valley Yokuts Tribe, The Ohlone Indian Tribe, Wilton Rancheria, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, and The Confederated Villages of Lisjan.
The Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People responded on June 19, 2023, with a request to consult on the proposed project. The City of Oakley contacted the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People on July 19, 2023, to discuss the next steps for consultation. Further response from the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People has not been received to date.
The Confederated Villages of Lisjan responded on June 21, 2023, with a request to consult on the proposed project. A request for information was received from The Confederated Villages of Lisjan Chairperson Corrina Gould on July 5, 2023. Chairperson Gould was supplied with the Cultural Resources Report prepared by Tom Origer & Associates for the proposed project on July 5, 2023. On November 1, 2023, Chairperson Gould responded that the Confederated Villages of Lisjan did not have any comments on the project. As such, consultation was concluded on November 1, 2023.
511
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3 November 2023
B. SOURCES
All technical reports and modeling results prepared for the project analysis are available at:
https://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/ceqa-documents/. The following documents are referenced information sources used for the purposes of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND):
1. Antioch Unified School District. Facilities Master Plan. July 2018.
2. Association of Bay Area Governments. Hazard Viewer. Available at:
https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience/data-research/hazard-viewer/. Accessed June 2023.
3. ASTM International. ASTM E1527, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. 2013.
4. Atlas Tree Service, Inc. Arborist Report, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, CA 94561.
September 16, 2022.
5. BAEZ Geotechnical Group. Geotechnical Investigation, Paseo Residential Subdivision, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, California. November 9, 2022.
6. Basics Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, California. May 2, 2023.
7. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023.
8. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Summary Reports. Available at:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/air-quality-summaries. Accessed June 2023.
9. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. May 2017.
10. Bellecci & Associates, Inc. Hydrology Report for The Village at 2092 Oakley Road.
December 2, 2022.
11. Bellecci & Associates, Inc. Stormwater Control Plan for The Village at 2092 Oakley Road.
March 2023.
12. CalEPA. Cortese List Data Resources. Available at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. Accessed June 2023.
13. California Air Resources Board. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality.
November 16, 2022.
14. California Air Resources Board. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005.
15. California Building Standards Commission. 2022 California Green Building Standards Code. 2023.
16. California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application.
Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed June 2023.
17. California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. Accessed May 2022.
18. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. January 7, 2009.
19. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Facility/Site Summary: Potrero Hill Landfill (48-AA-0075). Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Summary/3591. Accessed May 2023.
20. California Department of Transportation. California State Scenic Highway System Map.
Available at:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e805711 6f1aacaa. Accessed May 2023.
21. California Geologic Survey. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Brentwood 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Contra Costa County, California. 2018.
512
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4 November 2023
22. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Overview of Water-related Diseases and Contaminants in Private Wells. Available at:
https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/diseases.html. Accessed June 2023.
23. City of Oakley. City of Oakley 2020 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report.
September 2002.
24. City of Oakley. City of Oakley General Plan, Focused General Plan Update. Adopted January 11, 2022.
25. City of Oakley. Mobility White Paper, City of Oakley Focused General Plan Update.
December 2021.
26. City of Oakley. Oakley Municipal Code [Title 6, Chapter 11]. Updated February 23, 2021.
27. City of Oakley. Strategic Energy Plan. Fall 2015.
28. Contra Costa Conservation and Development. 2016 Agricultural Preserves Map. Available at: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/882/Map-of-Properties-UnderContract. Accessed May 2023.
29. Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. 2021 Annual Report. Available at:
https://www.cccfpd.org/2021-annual-report/. Accessed May 2023.
30. Contra Costa County. Transportation Analysis Guidelines. June 23, 2020.
31. Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed June 2023.
32. Diablo Water District. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2022.
33. East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan Association. Final East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan. October 2006.
34. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map 06013C0355G.
Effective March 21, 2017.
35. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December 2018.
36. H.T. Harvey & Associates. East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan – Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species. February 17, 2015.
37. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. November 2012.
38. Ironhouse Sanitary District. Sewer System Management Plan. April 2017.
39. Kenneth W. Strelo, Planning Manager, City of Oakley. Personal communication [email] with Rod Stinson, Vice President, Raney Planning and Management. September 6, 2022.
40. Olberding Environmental, Inc. Application Form and Planning Survey Report. May 9, 2023.
41. State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cqid= 8858350455. Accessed June 2023.
42. TJKM. Traffic Study for 2092 Oakley Road in Oakley, CA. November 1, 2022.
43. Tom Origer & Associates. Cultural Resources Study of the Property at 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, Contra Costa County, California. June 9, 2023.
44. Tom Origer & Associates. The Results of an Historic Evaluation of the Property at 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, Contra Costa County. September 28, 2023.
45. U.S. Census Bureau. Quick Facts, City of Oakley, California. Available at:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/oakleycitycalifornia/POP010220#POP0102
20. Accessed June 2023.
46. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Contaminated Land. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/report-environment/contaminated-land. Accessed June 2023. 513
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
5 November 2023
47. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Septic System Impacts on Water Sources.
Available at: https://www.epa.gov/septic/septic-system-impacts-water-sources. Accessed June 2023.
48. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Available at:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. Accessed May 2023. 514
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
6 November 2023
C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” or as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population and Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities and Service
Systems
Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
D. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial study:
I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Ken Strelo, Planning Manager City of Oakley
Printed Name For
515
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
7 November 2023
E. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
This IS/MND provides an environmental analysis pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed project. The applicant has submitted this application to the City of Oakley, which is the Lead Agency for the purposes of CEQA review. The IS/MND contains an analysis of the environmental effects of construction and operation of the proposed project.
In December 2002, the City of Oakley adopted the Oakley General Plan and the Oakley General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The General Plan EIR was a program-level EIR, prepared pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR], Sections 15000 et seq.). The General Plan EIR analyzed full implementation of the Oakley General Plan and identified measures to mitigate the significant adverse project and cumulative impacts associated with the General Plan.
In January 2022, the City of Oakley adopted the Focused General Plan Update and the Focused General Plan Update Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND). The Focused General Plan Update IS/ND analyzed implementation of the Focused General Plan Update. The Focused General Plan Update amended the City’s existing General Plan to bring it into compliance with State requirements related to environmental justice, mobility, and climate change and adaptation.
The Focused General Plan Update also updated the setting information, and provided minor revisions to the goals, policies, and programs in the following elements: Land Use, Growth Management, Open Space and Conservation, Parks and Recreation, Noise, and Economic Development. All updates were applied to be consistent with current conditions, to remove policies and programs that have already been implemented or are no longer applicable, to update policies and programs to reflect current City practices, and to clarify the City’s approach to achieving the vision and goals of the General Plan.
While the proposed project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment and Rezone, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150(a), the City of Oakley General Plan, Focused General Plan Update, General Plan EIR, and Focused General Plan Update IS/ND are incorporated by reference to the extent that the analysis included in the aforementioned documents is applicable to the proposed project. The aforementioned documents are available online at:
• https://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/departments/planning-zoning/reference-documents/ • https://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/general-plan-update/
The impact discussions for each section of this IS/MND have been largely based on information in the Oakley General Plan, Focused General Plan Update, Oakley General Plan EIR, and Focused General Plan Update IS/ND, as well as technical studies prepared for the proposed project.
The mitigation measures prescribed for environmental effects described in this IS/MND would be implemented in conjunction with the project, as required by CEQA, and the mitigation measures would be incorporated into the project. In addition, a project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) would be adopted in conjunction with approval of the project. 516
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
8 November 2023
F. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The following section provides a comprehensive description of the proposed project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, including the project location and setting, and project components.
Project Location and Setting
The project site, further identified by APN 037-110-031, is located at 2092 Oakley Road in the City of Oakley, California (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The site consists of approximately 9.99 acres and is planted as a vineyard with rows of grapevines. One single-family residence is located in the southern portion of the site, adjacent to Oakley Road and one single-family residence, one ancillary shed, and a cell tower resembling a water tower are located in the northeast corner of the site. In addition, a gravel roadway runs along the eastern boundary of the site and provides access to the single-family residence in the northeast corner of the site. A total of 16 trees exist on-site and the topography of the site is relatively flat.
Surrounding existing uses include a mobile home park to the north and west; a convenience store, gas station, and an oil change service shop to the east; a shopping center to the southeast, across Empire Avenue; and single-family residences and agricultural land to the south, across Oakley Road. The project site is located approximately 1.18 miles northeast of State Route (SR) 4 and approximately 1.12 miles east of SR 160. The City of Oakley General Plan designates the project site CO and the site is zoned C District.
Project Components
The proposed project would include the demolition of the two on-site existing single-family residences and one ancillary structure, removal of 14 on-site trees, and subdivision of the project site into 83 residential lots, and two open space lots (see Figure 3). The existing on-site cell tower would remain. The project would also include the development of three bioretention areas, a picnic area at the southern open space lot, a tot lot/picnic area at the open space lot in the northeast corner of the project site, and the off-site northerly extension of storm drain lines within Main Street and a water line tie-in within Oakley Road, as well as off-site improvements to widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes. The proposed project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the project site from CO to RM (GPA 01-22); a Rezone to change the zoning designation of the project site from C District to P-1 District (RZ 03-22); Final Development Plan (FDP 01-22), a Vesting Tentative Map (TM 04-22), and Design Review (DR 07-22). The following sections describe the foregoing project components.
General Plan Amendment
The proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the project site from CO to RM. The RM land use designation provides for more affordable, small lot development and to increase the availability of rental or entry-level housing.
Primary land uses include single-family dwellings; attached single-family residences, such as duplexes and duets; multiple-family residences, such as condominiums, town houses, apartments; and accessory structures normally auxiliary to the primary uses. Public and semipublic uses and similar and compatible uses are also allowed. The allowable residential density for the RM land use designation ranges from 5.5 to 9.6 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The residential density of the proposed project is 8.31 du/ac. 517
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
9 November 2023
Figure 1
Regional Project Location
Project Location
518
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
10 November 2023
Figure 2
Project Site Boundaries
Mobile Home
Community
Commercial
Uses
Single-Family
Residences
Single-Family
Residences
Single-Family
Residences
7-Eleven Gas
Station and
Convenience Store
Single-Family
Residence
Apartment
Complex
Senior Housing
Apartment
Complex
(Completed)
Senior Housing
Apartment
Complex
Oil Change
Business
Off-Site Utility
Improvements
(Part of Proposed
Project)
519
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
11 November 2023
Figure 3
Development Plan
520
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
12 November 2023
Rezone/Final Development Plan
The proposed project would include a Rezone and Final Development Plan to change the zoning designation of the project site from C District to P-1 District. The purpose of the P-1 District would be to allow diversification in the relationship of various uses, buildings, structures, lot sizes, and open spaces. Requirements for the P-1 District would be established as part of the adoption of the P-1 District for the project site. Approval of a Rezone would ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, and maintain substantial compliance with the City’s General Plan.
Preparation of a Final Development Plan is required for developments in the P-1 District pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9.1.1002.h.3.
Vesting Tentative Map
The Vesting Tentative Map would subdivide the project site into 83 single-family residential lots, Parcel A, and Parcel B (see Figure 4). The single-family lots would range in size from 2,920 square feet (sf) to 3,790 sf. Parcel A, located in the southern portion of the project site, would contain a picnic area. Parcel B, located in the northeastern corner of the project site, would contain a play structure/picnic area.
Below is additional detail regarding the site access and circulation, landscaping, utility infrastructure, and off-site improvements.
Site Access and Circulation
Primary vehicular access to the site would be provided by a new roadway (“A Street”) off of Oakley Road. An internal private roadway system would be constructed throughout the project site to provide access to each unit. The internal roadways would be within a 21 to 67-foot private rightof-way (ROW) and would generally provide 10 to 18 feet of travel lane in each direction (see Figure 5). Overall, the proposed project would include 166 covered parking spaces (garage spaces) and 83 uncovered parking spaces on B Street and G Street for guests, for a total of 249 parking spaces.
There are no private driveway parking spaces.
New curbs, gutters, and 4.5 to six-foot-wide sidewalks would be included intermittently along the roadways. Four-foot-wide walking paths would connect the sidewalks along the internal roadways to the porches located at the first-floor entry of each unit. The proposed project would also provide continuous sidewalks along the project’s frontage at Oakley Road. Emergency vehicle access would be provided by the new driveway off of Oakley Road and a new 21-foot-wide emergency vehicle access-only driveway off of Main Street, which would connect to the internal roadway in the northeastern corner of the site (see Figure 4 and Figure 5). Removable bollards would be installed as part of the northern most emergency vehicle access driveway and the EVA driveway would not be accessible to the general public.
Landscaping
The proposed project would include a 5,840-sf open space area located at the terminus of A Street (Figure 6). The park would include a pergola, picnic tables, park benches, bicycle racks, and a mailbox station. An 8,730-sf community park would be located in the northeast corner of the project site and would include a play structure and synthetic turf area, picnic tables, and bicycle racks. A total of 14 existing on-site trees would be removed as part of the proposed project; however, trees would be planted throughout the parks and along the internal roadway network within the project site and the frontage of the residential lots. In addition, a variety of drought tolerant shrubs, groundcover, and grasses would be planted throughout the project site. All landscaping would comply with the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
521
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
13 November 2023
Figure 4
Vesting Tentative Map
522
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
14 November 2023
Figure 5
Preliminary Roadway Sections
523
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
15 November 2023
Figure 6
Landscape Plan
524
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
16 November 2023
Utilities
A preliminary utility plan has been prepared for the proposed project and is included as Figure 7.
Water service for the proposed project would be provided by the Diablo Water District (DWD).
The proposed project would include the installation of new eight-inch water lines throughout the project site. The new water system would connect to the existing 10-inch water main within Oakley Road.
Sanitary sewer service for the proposed project would be provided by the Ironhouse Sanitary District (ISD). The proposed project would include the installation of new eight-inch sanitary sewer lines throughout the project site. The new sewer network would connect to the existing sanitary sewer main within Main Street.
A Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan has been prepared for the proposed project (see Figure 8). In order to manage and treat stormwater, the project site would be divided into 13 drainage management areas (DMAs). Stormwater from the impervious areas within DMA 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, and 3B would be collected by catch basins and curb cuts and directed through storm drain lines towards one of the three dry wells/bioretention facilities (Integrated Management Practices or IMPs) on-site. DMA 1A and 1B would be associated with IMP 1, located in the northwest corner of the site; DMA 2A and 2B would be associated with IMP 2, located in the northeast corner of the site; and DMA 3A and 3B would be associated with IMP 3, located along the eastern boundary of the site. Following treatment, stormwater from IMPs 1, 2, and 3 would be directed into a new network of 18-inch stormwater lines along the northern boundary of the site and ultimately into the City’s storm drain system in Main Street (see Figure 8). DMA 4 would be self-treating.
Stormwater from the impervious off-site sidewalks, located within DMA 10A, 10B, 11A, 11B, 12A, and 12B, would be captured and treated within three proposed IMPs (IMP 10, IMP 11, and IMP 12), which would serve as landscape planters along the project site frontage. The IMPs would range in size from 1,023 sf to 2,045 sf. Each IMP would have a perforated four-inch-wide pipe, which would function as underdrain and would transport any treated runoff to the City’s storm drain system.
The bioretention areas would accommodate runoff from all 83 residential lots, the roadways on the site, and the halfwidth of right of way along Oakley Road. The bioretention basin areas would be designed according to the criteria in the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook to treat stormwater on the project site prior to discharge into the City’s stormwater system.
Off-Site Improvements
To facilitate utility access to the project site, the proposed project would include off-site improvements to install 633.6 linear feet of 24-inch storm drain line within Main Street (see Figure 9). The new storm drain pipeline would extend from the northeast corner of the project site and connect to the existing 36-inch storm drain line located along the eastern frontage of the Les Schwab Tire Center on Main Street. In addition, as part of the proposed project, a water line tiein would be installed within Oakley Road in order to connect the new water pipeline within A Street to the existing 10-inch water main within Oakley Road. The off-site infrastructure improvements would involve a total of 686.4 feet of ground disturbance (633.6 feet associated with the storm drain and 52.8 feet associated with the water tie-in). The project would also include off-site improvements to widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes. All off-site improvements would occur within the existing and future dedicated right-of-way of Main Street and Oakley Road. 525
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
17 November 2023
Figure 7
Preliminary Utility Plan
526
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
18 November 2023
Figure 8
Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan
527
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
19 November 2023
Figure 9
Offsite Utility Plan
528
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
20 November 2023
Design Review
Pursuant to Section 9.1.1604 of the City’s Municipal Code, the proposed project would be subject to Design Review by the City. Specifically, the site plan would be analyzed based on elements of design, development location, arrangement of all structures, and design in harmony with surrounding facilities. The purpose of the regulations is to allow design review of all developments, signs, buildings, structures, and other facilities in order to further enhance the City’s appearance, and the livability and usefulness of properties. Additional detail regarding the proposed residences is provided below.
Proposed Residences
The proposed two-story, single-family residences would range in size from 2,277 sf to 2,656 sf.
Each residence would include four bedrooms, three bathrooms, a private porch and yard, and an attached two-car garage with a private five-foot-long driveway. Each private yard would be gated with a six-foot-tall fence and the units along the frontage of Oakley Road would also have a low picket fence and gate to separate the porch from the sidewalk. The residences would be arranged around and set back approximately 20 to 24 feet from the proposed internal roadways and onsite guest parking spaces. The front elevations of each unit are proposed to be constructed with various building materials, including stucco; concrete S-tile, concrete roof tile, or asphalt composition shingle roof; decorative gable accents; and would be painted a variety of colors.
Discretionary Actions
The proposed project would require the following approvals from the City of Oakley:
• Adoption of the IS/MND, including the MMRP;
• Approval of a General Plan Amendment of the 9.99-acre site from CO to RM; • Approval of a Rezone of the site from C District to P-1 District; • Approval of a Final Development Plan;
• Approval of a Vesting Tentative Map; and
• Approval of Design Review.
G. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following checklist contains the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The checklist form is used to describe the impacts of the proposed project. A discussion follows each environmental issue identified in the checklist. For this checklist, the following designations are used:
Potentially Significant Impact: An impact that could be significant, and for which no mitigation has been identified. If any potentially significant impacts are identified, an EIR must be prepared.
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires mitigation to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
Less-Than-Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant under CEQA relative to existing standards.
No Impact: The project would not have any impact.
529
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
21 November 2023
I. AESTHETICS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
State scenic highway?
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project
is in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion
a. Examples of typical scenic vistas include mountain ranges, ridgelines, or bodies of water as viewed from a highway, public space, or other area designated for the express purpose of viewing and sightseeing. In general, a project’s impact to a scenic resource would occur if development of the project would substantially change or remove a scenic resource. A scenic resource includes any such areas designated by a federal, State, or local agency.
The City’s predominantly flat landscape is rich in scenic resources. Oakley’s scenic resources include the waterways of the Delta, Dutch Slough, Marsh Creek, and Contra Costa Canal, habitat areas, and open space land. Other scenic resources include the view of Mount Diablo west of the City.1 Views of the Delta, Dutch Slough, Marsh Creek, and the Contra Costa Canal, are not available from the project site.
While, the project site is located in a relatively urbanized area, public views of Mount Diablo from Main Street to the southwest are framed by rolling hillsides within the project site (see Figure 10). Therefore, public views of Mount Diablo could be partially obstructed by development of the proposed project. However, as presented in Figure 10, potential views of Mount Diablo from Main Street are already partially blocked by surrounding development, including the existing on-site single-family residence and the single-family residences south and west of the project site. Furthermore, the speed limit on the Main Street is 40 miles per hour (mph) along the project frontage. Given the speed limit, public views from Main Street are temporary, occurring only as motorists briefly pass by the project site.
In addition, the project site is currently zoned C District, which allows for a maximum commercial building height of 35 feet. While buildout of the project site was not anticipated for residential uses, the proposed two-story single-family residences would be similar in size to the single-family residences south and west of the project site and would not exceed a height of 35 feet.
1 City of Oakley. City of Oakley General Plan, Focused General Plan Update [pg. 6-24]. Adopted January 11, 2022. 530
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
22 November 2023
Figure 10
Existing View of Mount Diablo from Main Street Looking Southwest Mount Diablo
Project Site
531
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
23 November 2023
Furthermore, the project site is currently designated by the City of Oakley General Plan as CO. While buildout of the site was not anticipated for residential uses, general development of the site has been anticipated, and development of residential uses would not result in greater impacts as compared to development of the site with commercial uses.
As such, the proposed project is within the realm of what has been anticipated for the site and potential impacts to scenic vistas and visual character associated with future development of the project site were already evaluated and considered in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that the General Plan’s goals, policies, and programs would reduce any potential impacts on the aesthetic qualities to a less-than-significant level.2 Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b. According to the California Scenic Highway Mapping System, portions of SR 160, 580, and 680 are listed as Officially Designated as State Scenic Highways, while portion of SR 4, 160, and 580 are listed as Eligible designations.3 The project site is located approximately two miles southeast of the portion of SR 160, which is an Officially Designated State Scenic Highway. The site is also approximately 19.5 miles north of SR 580 and 17.6 miles northeast of SR 680. Views of the project site from the aforementioned highways are not available due to the substantial distance and intervening urban development. Development of the proposed project would, therefore, not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
c. The project site is located within a developed area of the City. Therefore, the applicable CEQA consideration is whether the project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations related to scenic quality.
The project site has been previously anticipated for development by the City’s General Plan, and impacts related to degradation of visual character and quality were analyzed in the General Plan EIR. As noted previously, the proposed project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment from CO to RM and a Rezone from C District to P-1 District.
The RM land use designation provides for more affordable, small lot development and to increase the availability of rental or entry-level housing. The purpose of the P-1 District is to allow diversification in the relationship of various uses, buildings, structures, lot sizes, and open spaces. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would ensure compatibility with the surrounding land uses. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone would contribute to the consistency of scenic quality in the project area. The proposed development would be generally consistent with the existing residential development to the south of the site, across Oakley Road. Following approval of the Rezone, the proposed project would comply with the adopted Final Development Plan of the P-1 District for the project site, which would include project-specific development standards.
Implementation of the proposed project would also require Design Review, which is a City regulation related to scenic quality. Design Review would ensure that the aesthetic and 2 City of Oakley. City of Oakley 2020 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report [pg. 3-24]. September 2002. 3 California Department of Transportation. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Available at:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed May 2023.
532
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
24 November 2023
architectural design of the development would be compatible with surrounding development. The proposed project would include landscaping features at the project site frontage and within the project site that would be similar to existing features in the development west of the site, and proposed residences would be designed in keeping with the surrounding residential land uses.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic qualities, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
d. The only existing sources of light on the project site are the two on-site single-family residences. Therefore, redevelopment of the project site with 83 residences would add new sources of light and glare to the site, where minimal sources currently exist. The proposed project is anticipated to include streetlights along internal roadways and the project frontage, as well as interior lights spilling from the windows of the proposed residences. In addition, the proposed project would generate vehicle trips which, in turn, would create sources of light from vehicle headlights. As previously discussed, the project site is surrounded by existing development including similar land uses. Light and glare associated with the proposed project would be expected to be similar to that of the surrounding area.
Furthermore, pursuant to Section 9.1.1604 of the City’s Municipal Code, the project would be required to undergo a Design Review to ensure that development of the project would be in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines, which, among other things, establishes the City’s standard for residential streetlights and limits residential lighting for security purposes. Therefore, any creation of new sources of light and glare by the proposed project would be considered a less-than-significant impact. 533
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
25 November 2023
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST
RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Discussion
a,e. Pursuant to the California Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project site is designated as “Farmland of Statewide Importance.”4 The DOC defines Farmland of Statewide Importance as “irrigated land that has a good combination of physical and chemical characteristics for the production of agricultural crops. According to the Department of Conservation, in order for land to be considered Farmland of Statewide Importance, the land must have been used for agricultural purposes within four years of the mapping date. Because the project site was mapped as Farmland of Statewide Importance in 2018, the site must have been used as agricultural land between 2014 and 2018 for the designation to be appropriate. The project site is currently planted as a vineyard with rows of grape vines. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared for the project site, the site has been historically farmed since 1939.
5 However, the site is not zoned or designated in the
General Plan for agricultural uses; rather, the site is zoned for Commercial uses and is designated in the General Plan as Commercial. Furthermore, the project site is surrounded by urban development to the north, east, and west. Nonetheless, due to the existing California DOC designation, implementation of the proposed project would convert land designated as Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural uses.
The City of Oakley General Plan EIR and Update IS/ND analyzed the impacts of Farmland of Statewide Importance conversion that would result from buildout of the City and determined the results would be less-than-significant with implementation of General Plan 4 California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. Accessed May 2023. 5 Basics Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, California. May 2, 2023.
534
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
26 November 2023
policies. Because the project site has already been planned for urban development by the City, buildout of the site with non-agricultural uses and the conversion of Farmland of Statewide Importance has already been anticipated by the General Plan EIR. As a result, the project’s impact related to the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to a non-agricultural use would be less than significant.
b. The site is not under an active Williamson Act contract and is not designated or zoned for agricultural uses.
6 Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract, and no impact would occur. c,d. The project site is not zoned forest land (as defined in PRC Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by PRC Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104[g]). Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact with regard to conversion of forest land or any potential conflict with forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production zoning.
6 Contra Costa Conservation and Development. 2016 Agricultural Preserves Map. Available at:
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/882/Map-of-Properties-Under-Contract. Accessed May 2023.
535
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
27 November 2023
III. AIR QUALITY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Discussion
a,b. The City of Oakley is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The SFBAAB area is currently designated as a nonattainment area for State and federal ozone, State and federal fine particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), and State respirable particulate matter 10 microns in diameter (PM10) ambient air quality standards (AAQS). The SFBAAB is designated attainment or unclassified for all other AAQS. It should be noted that on January 9, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued a final rule to determine that the Bay Area has attained the 24-hour PM2.5 federal AAQS. Nonetheless, the Bay Area must continue to be designated as nonattainment for the federal PM2.5 AAQS until such time as the BAAQMD submits a redesignation request and a maintenance plan to the USEPA, and the USEPA approves the proposed redesignation. The USEPA has not yet approved a request for redesignation of the SFBAAB; therefore, the SFBAAB remains in nonattainment for 24-hour PM2.5.
In compliance with regulations, due to the nonattainment designations of the area, the BAAQMD periodically prepares and updates air quality plans that provide emission reduction strategies to achieve attainment of the AAQS, including control strategies to reduce air pollutant emissions through regulations, incentive programs, public education, and partnerships with other agencies. The current air quality plans are prepared in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
The most recent federal ozone plan is the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan, which was adopted on October 24, 2001 and approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on November 1, 2001. The plan was submitted to the USEPA on November 30, 2001 for review and approval. The most recent State ozone plan is the 2017 Clean Air Plan, adopted on April 19, 2017. The 2017 Clean Air Plan was developed as a multi-pollutant plan that provides an integrated control strategy to reduce ozone, PM, toxic air contaminants (TACs), and greenhouse gases (GHGs). Although a plan for achieving the State PM10 standard is not required, the BAAQMD has prioritized measures to reduce PM in developing the control strategy for the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The control strategy serves as the backbone of the BAAQMD’s current PM control program.
The aforementioned air quality plans contain mobile source controls, stationary source controls, and transportation control measures to be implemented in the region to attain the State and federal AAQS within the SFBAAB. Adopted BAAQMD rules and regulations, as 536
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
28 November 2023
well as the thresholds of significance, have been developed with the intent to ensure continued attainment of AAQS, or to work towards attainment of AAQS for which the area is currently designated nonattainment, consistent with applicable air quality plans. For development projects, BAAQMD establishes significance thresholds for emissions of the ozone precursors reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX), as well as for PM10, and PM2.5, expressed in pounds per day (lbs/day) and tons per year (tons/yr).
The thresholds are listed in Table 1. Thus, by exceeding the BAAQMD’s mass emission thresholds for construction and/or operational emissions of ROG, NOX, or PM10, a project would be considered to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the BAAQMD’s air quality planning efforts.
Table 1
BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant
Construction Operational
Average Daily
Emissions
(lbs/day)
Average Daily
Emissions
(lbs/day)
Maximum Annual
Emissions
(tons/year)
ROG 54 54 10
NOx 54 54 10
PM10 (exhaust) 82 82 15
PM2.5 (exhaust) 54 54 10
Source: BAAQMD, Air Quality Guidelines, April 2023.
Particulate matter can be split into two categories: fugitive and exhaust. The BAAQMD thresholds of significance for exhaust are presented in Table 1. It should be noted that BAAQMD does not maintain quantitative thresholds for fugitive emissions of PM10 or PM2.5, rather, BAAQMD requires all projects within the district’s jurisdiction to implement Basic Construction Mitigation Measures (BCMMs) related to dust suppression.
The proposed project’s construction and operational emissions were quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) software version 2022.1.1.14 – a Statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify air quality emissions, including GHG emissions, from land use projects. The model applies inherent default values for various land uses, including construction data, vehicle mix, trip length, average speed, compliance with the 2022 California Building Standards Code (CBSC), etc. Where projectspecific information is available, such information should be applied in the model.
Accordingly, the proposed project’s modeling assumes the following project and/or sitespecific information:
• Demolition would involve approximately 2,000 sf of building material and would occur over approximately one week;
• Construction would begin in June 2024 and occur over approximately one year; • Operational trip generation rates were updated to 9.33 daily vehicle trips per unit, consistent with the project-specific Traffic Study prepared by TJKM; • Wood-burning fireplaces would not be included;
• The project would comply with the MWELO and the 2019 CALGreen Code; and • The project would comply with all applicable provisions of the 2022 California CBSC.
537
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
29 November 2023
The proposed project’s construction emissions associated with the off-site infrastructure improvements were quantified using the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s (SMAQMD) Road Construction Emissions Model (RoadMod) Version 9.0.0. While the project site is not located within the jurisdiction of SMAQMD, the model is an industry standard tool for evaluating construction emissions throughout the State. SMAQMD’s RoadMod was used to calculated the ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions associated with project construction. RoadMod requires the user to input information related to the area of disturbance, the length of time a project would occur, and, for linear non-roadway projects, a list of equipment that would be used during project construction. Accordingly, the proposed project’s modeling assumes the following project and/or site-specific information:
• Construction associated with the off-site infrastructure improvements would begin in June 2024 and occur during the grading phase for approximately 1.86 months; • The off-site infrastructure improvements would involve a total of 686.4 feet of ground disturbance (633.6 feet associated with the storm drain and 52.8 feet associated with the water tie-in); and
• The total disturbance area related to the off-site infrastructure improvements would be 0.08 acres.
The proposed project’s estimated emissions associated with construction and operations are presented and discussed in further detail below. A discussion of the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative air quality conditions is provided below as well. All CalEEMod and RoadMod modeling results are included as Appendix A to this IS/MND.
Construction Emissions
During construction of the proposed project, various types of equipment and vehicles would temporarily operate on the project site. Construction exhaust emissions would be generated from construction equipment, vegetation clearing and earth movement activities, construction worker commutes, and construction material hauling for the entire construction period. The aforementioned activities would involve the use of diesel- and gasoline-powered equipment that would generate emissions of criteria pollutants. Project construction activities also represent sources of fugitive dust, which includes PM emissions. As construction of the proposed project would generate air pollutant emissions intermittently within the site and vicinity, until all construction has been completed, construction is a potential concern because the project is in a non-attainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5.
According to the CalEEMod and RoadMod modeling results, buildout of the proposed project would result in maximum unmitigated construction criteria air pollutant emissions as shown in Table 2. As shown in the table, the proposed project’s construction emissions would be below the applicable thresholds of significance for ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5. 538
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
30 November 2023
Table 2
Maximum Unmitigated Construction Emissions (lbs/day)
Pollutant
Construction
Emissions
Threshold of
Significance
Exceeds
Threshold?
ROG 13.24 54 NO
NOX 53.2 54 NO
PM10* 13.76 82 NO
PM2.5* 6.42 54 NO
Notes:
* Denotes emissions from exhaust only. BAAQMD does not have adopted PM thresholds for fugitive emissions.
Sources: CalEEMod, June 2023 (see Appendix A).
RoadMod, June 2023 (see Appendix A).
All projects within the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD are required to implement all of the BAAQMD’s BCMMs, which would be required by the City as conditions of approval:
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
6. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.
7. All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
8. Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a six- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
9. Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the 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 General Air Pollution Complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
The proposed project’s required implementation of the BAAQMD’s BCMMs listed above for the project’s construction activities would help to further minimize construction-related emissions.
Overall, because the proposed project would be below the applicable thresholds of significance for construction emissions, project construction would not result in a significant air quality impact.
539
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
31 November 2023
Operational Emissions
Operational emissions of ROG, NOX, and PM would be generated by the proposed project from both mobile and stationary sources. Day-to-day activities, such as the future vehicle trips to and from the project site, would make up the majority of the mobile emissions.
Emissions would also occur from area sources, such as landscape maintenance equipment exhaust.
According to the CalEEMod results, buildout of the proposed project would result in maximum unmitigated operational criteria air pollutant emissions as shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Maximum Unmitigated Operational Emissions
Pollutant
Proposed Project
Emissions
Threshold of
Significance Exceeds
lbs/day tons/yr lbs/day tons/yr Threshold?
ROG 7.78 1.33 54 10 NO
NOX 4.03 0.69 54 10 NO
PM10* 5.82 1.04 82 15 NO
PM2.5 * 1.57 0.28 54 10 NO
Note:
* Denotes emissions from exhaust only. BAAQMD does not have adopted PM thresholds for fugitive emissions.
Source: CalEEMod, June 2023 (see Appendix A).
As shown in the table, operations of the proposed project would be below the applicable thresholds of significance. Thus, operations of the project would not be considered to conflict with air quality plans during project operations.
Cumulative Emissions
Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. A single project is not sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of AAQS. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant. In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, BAAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. The thresholds of significance presented in Table 1 represent the levels at which a project’s individual emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursors would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the SFBAAB’s existing air quality conditions. If a project exceeds the significance thresholds presented in Table 1, the proposed project’s emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse cumulative air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions.
Because the proposed project would result in both construction-related and operational emissions below the applicable thresholds of significance, construction and operations of the project would not be expected to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the region’s existing air quality conditions.
540
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
32 November 2023
Conclusion
As stated previously, the applicable regional air quality plans include the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan and the 2017 Clean Air Plan. According to BAAQMD, if a project would not result in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts, after the application of all feasible mitigation, the project may be considered consistent with the air quality plans.
As discussed above, the proposed project would result in construction and operational emissions below the applicable thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans, violate any air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria air pollutant, and impacts would be considered less than significant.
c. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others, due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Heightened sensitivity may be caused by health problems, proximity to the emissions source, and/or duration of exposure to air pollutants. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with existing health problems are especially vulnerable to the effects of air pollution.
Accordingly, land uses that are typically considered to be sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. Existing sensitive receptors near the project site include the mobile homes located to the north and west of the project site boundary; the nearest mobile home is located 20 feet west of the site boundary. The closest receptor to where the off-site infrastructure improvements would occur along Main Street is located approximately 30 feet to the west of the off-site improvement area. The closest receptor to where the off-site improvements would occur along Oakley Road is located 120 feet southwest of the off-site improvement area.
The major pollutant concentrations of concern are localized carbon monoxide (CO) emissions and TACs, as well as regional effects of emissions of criteria pollutants, which are addressed in further detail below.
Localized CO Emissions
Localized concentrations of CO are related to the levels of traffic and congestion along streets and at intersections. High levels of localized CO concentrations are only expected where background levels are high, and traffic volumes and congestion levels are high.
Emissions of CO are of potential concern, as the pollutant is a toxic gas that results from the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as gasoline or wood. CO emissions are particularly related to traffic levels.
In order to provide a conservative indication of whether a project would result in localized CO emissions that would exceed the applicable threshold of significance, the BAAQMD has established screening criteria for localized CO emissions. According to BAAQMD, a proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to localized CO emission concentrations if all of the following conditions are true for the project:
541
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
33 November 2023
• The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans;
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or urban street canyon, below-grade roadway).
While BAAQMD has established the foregoing screening criteria for potential impacts, it should be noted that the SFBAAB has been in attainment of California AAQS (CAAQS) and National AAQS (NAAQS) for CO for more than 20 years.7 Due to the continued attainment of CAAQS and NAAQS, and advances in vehicle emissions technologies, the likelihood that any single project would create a CO hotspot is minimal. With regard to the proposed project, according to the Traffic Study prepared by TJKM, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 774 daily vehicle trips, 57 of which would be during the AM peak hour, and 77 during the PM peak hour.8 The addition of 134 total peak hour trips per day generated by the proposed project is not anticipated to increase traffic volumes at any nearby intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour. Furthermore, areas where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is limited due to tunnels, underpass, or similar features do not exist in the project area. Therefore, based on the BAAQMD’s screening criteria for localized CO emissions, the proposed project would not be expected to result in substantial levels of localized CO at surrounding intersections or generate localized concentrations of CO that would exceed standards or cause health hazards.
TAC Emissions
Another category of environmental concern is TACs. The CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Handbook) provides recommended setback distances for sensitive land uses from major sources of TACs, including, but not limited to, freeways and high traffic roads, distribution centers, gas dispensing facilities, and rail yards. The CARB has identified diesel particulate matter (DPM) from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC; thus, high volume freeways, stationary diesel engines, and facilities attracting heavy and constant diesel vehicle traffic are identified as having the highest associated health risks from DPM. Health risks associated with TACs are a function of both the concentration of emissions and the duration of exposure, where the higher the concentration and/or the longer the period of time that a sensitive receptor is exposed to pollutant concentrations would correlate to a higher health risk. 7 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Air Quality Summary Reports. Available at:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/air-quality-summaries. Accessed June 2023. 8 TJKM. Traffic Study for 2092 Oakley Road in Oakley, CA. November 1, 2022. 542
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
34 November 2023
It should be noted that impacts of the environment on a project (as opposed to impacts of a project on the environment) are beyond the scope of required CEQA review.9 Therefore, for the purposes of the CEQA analysis, the relevant inquiry is not whether residents at the proposed single-family homes would be exposed to pre-existing TAC emissions, but instead whether project-generated emissions would exacerbate pre-existing conditions.
Although the analysis of a project’s existing TAC emissions environment is not required for CEQA purposes, such analysis is included in this document for compliance with applicable CARB recommendations. Gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs) are considered sources of various types of TACs, including benzene. As a result, in order to reduce adverse health effects, the CARB recommends that typical GDFs be sited at least 50 feet away from existing sensitive land uses, or that a detailed health risk assessment be performed if such land uses are within 50 feet from each other. 10 The project site is located
approximately 160 feet west of an existing gas station. Therefore, the proposed residences would be sited outside of the CARB’s recommended setback distance from GDFs, and, based on agency guidance, health risks would be less than significant.
As previously noted, the nearest existing sensitive receptors to the project site are the mobile homes located north and west of the project site. The proposed project does not include any operations that would be considered a substantial source of TACs.
Accordingly, operations of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to excess concentrations of TACs.
Short-term, construction-related activities would result in the generation of TACs, specifically DPM, from on-road haul trucks and off-road equipment exhaust emissions.
Construction is temporary and occurs over a relatively short duration in comparison to the operational lifetime of the proposed project. Health risks are typically associated with exposure to high concentrations of TACs over extended periods of time (e.g., 30 years or greater), whereas the construction period associated with the proposed project is estimated to be approximately one year.
All construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated per the In-Use OffRoad Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which is intended to help reduce emissions associated with off-road diesel vehicles and equipment, including DPM. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable BAAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. In addition, only portions of the site would be disturbed at a time throughout the construction period, with operation of construction equipment occurring intermittently throughout the course of a day rather than continuously at any one location on the project site. Operation of construction equipment within portions of the development area would allow for the dispersal of emissions, and 9 Impacts of the environment on a project (as opposed to impacts of a project on the environment) are beyond the scope of required CEQA review. “[T]he purpose of an EIR is to identify the significant effects of a project on the environment, not the significant effects of the environment on the project.” (Ballona Wetlands Land Trust v. City of Los Angeles, (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 455, 473 (Ballona).) The California Supreme Court recently held that “CEQA does not generally require an agency to consider the effects of existing environmental conditions on a proposed project’s future users or residents. What CEQA does mandate… is an analysis of how a project might exacerbate existing environmental hazards.” (California Building Industry Assn. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 392; see also Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Investment & Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 160, 197 [“identifying the effects on the project and its users of locating the project in a particular environmental setting is neither consistent with CEQA's legislative purpose nor required by the CEQA statutes”], quoting Ballona, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at p. 474.) 10 California Air Resources Board. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective [pg. 32].
April 2005.
543
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
35 November 2023
would ensure that construction-activity is not continuously occurring in the portions of the project site closest to existing receptors. Because construction equipment on-site would not operate for long periods of time and would be used at varying locations within the site, associated emissions of DPM would not occur at the same location (or be evenly spread throughout the entire project site) for long periods of time. Due to the temporary nature of construction and the relatively short duration of potential exposure to associated emissions, the potential for any one sensitive receptor in the area to be exposed to concentrations of pollutants for a substantially extended period of time would be low. For the aforementioned reasons, project construction would not be expected to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Criteria pollutant emissions have the ability to cause negative health effects. As discussed under section ‘a’ above, the AAQS presented are health-based standards designed to ensure safe levels of criteria pollutants that avoid specific adverse health effects. Because the SFBAAB is designated as nonattainment for State and federal eight-hour ozone and State PM10 standards, the BAAQMD, along with other air districts in the SFBAAB region, has adopted federal and state attainment plans to demonstrate progress towards attainment of the AAQS. Full implementation of the attainment plans would ensure that the AAQS are attained and sensitive receptors within the SFBAAB are not exposed to excess concentrations of criteria pollutants. The BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance were established with consideration given to the health-based air quality standards established by the AAQS, and are designed to aid the district in implementing the applicable attainment plans to achieve attainment of the AAQS. Thus, if a project’s criteria pollutant emissions exceed the BAAQMD’s emission thresholds of significance, a project would be considered to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the BAAQMD’s air quality planning efforts, thereby delaying attainment of the AAQS. Because the AAQSs are representative of safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects, a project’s hinderance of attainment of the AAQS could be considered to contribute towards regional health effects associated with the existing nonattainment status of ozone and PM standards.
The proposed project would not result in short-term construction-related or long-term operational emissions of criteria pollutants that would exceed BAAQMD standards.
Consequently, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the BAAQMD’s adopted attainment plans nor would the proposed project inhibit attainment of regional AAQS. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not contribute towards regional health effects associated with the existing nonattainment status of ozone and PM10 standards.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the proposed project would not expose any sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of localized CO, TACs, or criteria pollutants associated with construction or operation. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-thansignificant impact related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
d. Emissions such as those leading to odors have the potential to adversely affect sensitive receptors within the project area. Pollutants of principal concern include emissions leading to odors, emission of dust, or emissions considered to constitute air pollutants. Air 544
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
36 November 2023
pollutants have been discussed in sections ‘a’ through ‘c’ above. Therefore, the following discussion focuses on emissions of odors and dust.
Pursuant to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard.11 Manifestations of a person’s reaction to odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache). The presence of an odor impact is dependent on several variables including: the nature of the odor source; the frequency of odor generation; the intensity of odor; the distance of odor source to sensitive receptors; wind direction; and sensitivity of the receptor.
Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the number of variables that can influence the potential for an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, quantification of significant odor impacts is relatively difficult. Typical odor-generating land uses include, but are not limited to, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and composting facilities. The proposed project would not introduce any such land uses.
Construction activities often include diesel-fueled equipment and heavy-duty diesel trucks, which can create odors associated with diesel fumes, which could be found to be objectionable. However, as discussed above, construction activities would be temporary, and hours of operation for construction equipment would be restricted to the hours of 7:30 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday and 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekends holiday per Section 4.2.208 of the City of Oakley Municipal Code. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable BAAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. The aforementioned regulations would help to minimize air pollutant emissions, as well as any associated odors. Accordingly, substantial objectionable odors would not be expected to occur during construction activities or affect a substantial number of people.
BAAQMD regulates objectionable odors through Regulation 7, Odorous Substances, which does not become applicable until the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO) receives odor complaints from ten or more complainants within a 90-day period. Once effective, Regulation 7 places general limitation on odorous substances and specific emission limitations on certain odorous compounds, which remain effective until such time that citizen complaints have not been received by the APCO for one year. The limits of Regulation 7 become applicable again when the APCO receives odor complaints from five or more complainants within a 90-day period. Thus, although not anticipated, if odor complaints are made after the proposed project is developed, the BAAQMD would ensure that such odors are addressed, and any potential odor effects are minimized or eliminated.
With respect to dust, as noted previously, all projects under the jurisdiction of BAAQMD are required to implement the BAAQMD’s BCMMs. Such measures would act to reduce construction-related dust by ensuring that haul trucks with loose material are covered, reducing vehicle dirt track-out, and limiting vehicle speeds within project site, among other methods, which would ensure that construction of the proposed project does not result in substantial emissions of dust. Although the project would require soil hauling, California Vehicle Code Section 23114(e) requires all haul trucks to be covered, which would minimize emissions of fugitive dust during transport. Following project construction, 11 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines [pg. 7-1].
May 2017.
545
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
37 November 2023
vehicles operating within the project site would be limited to paved areas of the site, and non-paved areas would be landscaped. Thus, project operations would not include sources of dust that could adversely affect a substantial number of people.
For the aforementioned reasons, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people, and a less-than-significant impact would occur. 546
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
38 November 2023
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation
Community Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
Discussion
a,f. The following discussion is based primarily on a Planning Survey Report (PSR), prepared by Olberding Environmental, Inc. (Olberding) for the proposed project (see Appendix B). 12 The PSR did not evaluate the off-site improvement areas because all ground disturbance would occur within the existing ROW, where development has already occurred, and sensitive biological resources do not exist.
Currently, the approximately 9.99-acre project site is planted with vineyards and rows of grapevines. One single-family residence is located along the southern boundary of the property, and one single-family residence, one ancillary shed, and a cell tower are located in the northeast corner of the site. A total of 16 trees are located on-site.
Special-status species include those plant and wildlife species that have been formally listed, are proposed as endangered or threatened, or are candidates for such listing under the federal and State Endangered Species Acts. Both acts afford protection to listed and proposed species. In addition, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Species of Special Concern, which are species that face extirpation in California if current population and habitat trends continue, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Birds of Conservation Concern, sensitive species included in USFWS Recovery Plans, and CDFW 12 Olberding Environmental, Inc. Application Form and Planning Survey Report. May 9, 2023. 547
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
39 November 2023
special-status invertebrates are all considered special-status species. Although CDFW Species of Special Concern generally do not have special legal status, they are given special consideration under CEQA. In addition to regulations for special-status species, most birds in the U.S., including non-status species, are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918. Under the MBTA, destroying active nests, eggs, and young is illegal. Species that meet the definition of rare, threatened, or endangered under Section 15380 of the CEQA guidelines are also considered special-status species. In addition, plant species on California Native Plant Society (CNPS) categories 1A, 1B, 2B, 3, and 4 are considered special-status plant species and are protected under CEQA.
The project site is located within the boundaries of the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (ECCCHCP/NCCP), which is intended to provide an effective framework to protect natural resources in the County, including special-status species. Raney Planning and Management conducted a search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) within the nine U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangles that define the project region, including the project site. The CNDDB search was conducted in order to identify special-status plant and wildlife species that may occur at or near the project site. The intent of the database review was to identify documented occurrences of special-status species in the vicinity of the project area, to determine their locations relative to the project site, and to evaluate whether the site meets the habitat requirements of such species. Furthermore, the CNDDB search was conducted to identify any special-status species that are not covered by the ECCCHCP/NCCP and were not evaluated in the PSR prepared by Olberding.
Based on the results of the CNDDB search, 48 special-status plant species and 48 specialstatus wildlife species have the potential to occur within the vicinity of the project site (see Appendix C). Of the 96 special-status species that could occur within the vicinity of the project site, 24 species (14 special-status plant species and 10 special-status wildlife species) are covered under the ECCCHCP/NCCP and 72 species (34 special-status plant species and 38 special-status wildlife species) are not covered under the ECCCHCP/NCCP. Because the project site does not support grasslands, coastal scrub, wetlands, riparian forest, streams/creek, and other forms of aquatic habitat, the majority of the special-status species were eliminated from further consideration due to lack of suitable on-site habitat. Furthermore, due to past site disturbance, the majority of species are not expected to occur on-site.
In February 2015, the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservancy prepared an ECCCHCP/NCCP Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species.13 The purpose of the assessment was to provide a programmatic, cumulative CEQA effects analysis for CEQA species not covered by the HCP/NCCP. The 2015 ECCCHCP/NCCP Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species concluded that mitigation measures required in the ECCCHCP/NCCP also provide mitigation for non-covered species; therefore, projects consistent with the ECCCHCP/NCCP would have a less-than-significant impact on other potential special-status species.
According to the 2015 ECCCHCP/NCCP Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species, for all but two of the potential special-status species addressed (Lime Ridge navarretia [Navarretia gowenii] and the Lime Ridge eriastrum [Eriastrum ertterae]), impacts would be 13 H.T. Harvey & Associates. East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan – Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species. February 17, 2015.
548
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
40 November 2023
less than significant under CEQA. Because of uncertainty regarding the distribution of the Lime Ridge navarretia and the Lime Ridge eriastrum, the 2015 ECCCHCP/NCCP Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species concluded that a potentially significant impact could occur related to the two aforementioned species. Based on the CNDDB search conducted by Raney Planning & Management, Inc., known occurrences of Lime Ridge navarretia or Lime Ridge eriastrum did not occur within the nine USGS quadrangles that define the project region, including the project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not impact the species. Based on the conclusions of the 2015 ECCCHCP/NCCP Assessment of Plan Effects on CEQA Species and the absence of the Lime Ridge navarretia and Lime Ridge eriastrum in the vicinity of the project site, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact on any potential special-status plant species and potential special-status wildlife species not covered by the ECCCHCP/NCCP that could occur within the vicinity of the project site because the proposed project would be required to comply with the ECCCHCP/NCCP.
In compliance with the ECCCHCP/NCCP, the PSR prepared for the proposed project by Olberding included all species covered under the ECCCHCP/NCCP. According to the PSR, the approximately 9.99-acre site is categorized by Irrigated Agriculture (Vineyard) land cover type. Based on the on-site land cover type, Olberding Environmental, Inc. determined that covered plant species do not have the potential to occur on-site. As a result, special-status plants are not discussed further. However, based on the on-site land cover types, Olberding conducted planning-level surveys on the project site for western burrowing owl and Swainson’s hawk.
Special-Status Wildlife
As part of the PSR, Olberding conducted a field survey on April 27, 2023, of species habitat within the entire study area, including visible portions of the adjacent properties.
The purpose of the habitat survey was to evaluate wildlife habitats and the potential for any protected species to occur on or adjacent to the project site. Olberding also conducted a reconnaissance-level raptor survey on-site and a reconnaissance-level burrowing owl survey to identify potential burrow sites or burrowing owl use of on-site habitat. The general presence and density of suitable burrow sites (e.g., rodent burrows) was evaluated for the project site.
According to the PSR, the project site provides foraging opportunities for western burrowing owl (Athene cunnicularia) and breeding and foraging opportunities for Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni). In addition, other avian species protected by the MBTA could use the project site as foraging and potential nesting habitat.
Western Burrowing Owl
The primary habitat requirement for western burrowing owls is small mammal burrows that the species uses for nesting. Typically, the species uses abandoned ground squirrel burrows, but western burrowing owls have been known to dig burrows in softer soils. In urban areas, western burrowing owls may use pipes, culverts, and piles of material as artificial burrows. Western burrowing owls breed semi-colonially from March through August.
While the CNDDB search returned 53 occurrences of burrowing owl within a five-mile radius of the project site, the nearest record of burrowing owl in the CNDDB search area is approximately 1.5-mile south of the project site. According to the PSR, the area 549
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
41 November 2023
surrounding the project site is historically known to provide suitable habitat for western burrowing owls. Western burrowing owls are known to occur within disked fields, if small mammal burrows are present. In addition, the on-site sandy soil could provide suitable foraging opportunities for western burrowing owls. As part of the PSR, the site was inspected for western burrowing owls and ground squirrel burrows with evidence of burrowing owl occupancy (i.e., white wash, pellets, feathers). While pocket gopher burrows were observed on-site, pocket gopher burrows are too small for western burrowing owls. Furthermore, ground squirrel burrows were not observed during the survey. Nonetheless, because suitable habitat for western burrowing owl exists on the project site, pre-construction surveys for western burrowing owls would be required by the ECCCHCP/NCCP to confirm presence or absence of the species. If western burrowing owls are present on or near the project site, development of the proposed project could result in an adverse impact to the species.
Swainson’s Hawk
Swainson’s hawk is a summer resident and migrant in California’s Central Valley and scattered portions of the southern California interior. Areas typically used by Swainson’s hawk for nesting include the edge of narrow bands of riparian vegetation, isolated patches of oak woodland, lone trees, planted and natural trees associated with roads, farmyards and sometimes adjacent residential areas. Swainson’s hawk typically forage in open habitats, including grasslands, open woodlands, and agricultural areas.
While the CNDDB search returned 14 occurrences of Swainson’s hawk within a five-mile radius of the project site, the nearest record of Swainson’s hawk in the CNDDB search area is approximately one mile northwest of the project site. According to the PSR, the area surrounding the project site is historically known to provide suitable habitat for Swainson’s hawk. While Swainson’s hawks characteristically prefer to nest in large, tall trees, such as eucalyptus, along riparian corridors, some of the ornamental trees on the project site and other trees within 1,000 feet of the project site may provide suitable nesting sites. The project site provides suitable foraging habitat within the vineyard, but the surrounding developments may deter Swainson’s hawk as they prefer to forage in open habitat, such as fields. Based on the above, the PSR determined that the Swainson’s hawk has a moderate potential to occur on the project site in a breeding and foraging capacity. Because suitable habitat for Swainson’s hawk exists on the project site, preconstruction surveys for Swainson’s hawk would be required by the ECCCHCP/NCCP to confirm presence or absence of the species. If Swainson’s hawks are present on or near the project site, development of the proposed project could result in an adverse impact to the species.
Nesting Raptors and Migratory Birds
The trees on-site may be used by other migratory birds protected by the MBTA for nesting.
As part of the proposed project, 14 of the 16 trees on site would be removed. Construction activities that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors and migratory birds (i.e., lead to the abandonment of active nests) or result in mortality of individual birds constitute a violation of State and federal laws, and in the event that such species occur on or near the project site during the breeding season, project construction activities could result in an adverse effect to species protected under the MBTA.
550
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
42 November 2023
ECCCHCP/NCCP Requirements
Procedures for pre-construction surveys, best management practices, and construction monitoring, as well as Applicable Avoidance and Minimization Measures for species covered by the ECCCHCP/NCCP are outlined in Section 6.3.3 Surveys for Construction Monitoring and Section 6.4.3 Species-Level Measures of the ECCCHCP/NCCP.14 The project would be required to comply with all ECCCHCP/NCCP requirements, including conducting pre-construction surveys prior to ground disturbance activities to establish whether nests of Swainson’s hawks are occupied. If nests are occupied, the project would be required to comply with the minimization requirements and construction monitoring in the ECCCHCP/NCCP. In compliance with the ECCCHCP/NCCP, the project would also be required to follow Applicable Avoidance and Minimization Measures if nests are located within 1,000 feet of the project site.
All birds covered by the ECCCHCP/NCCP (tricolored blackbird, western burrowing owl, golden eagle, and Swainson’s hawk) are also considered migratory birds and are subject to the prohibitions of the MBTA. Therefore, actions conducted under the ECCCHCP/NCCP comply with the provisions of the MBTA. Conservation Measure 1.12, Implement Best Management Practices for Rural Road Maintenance, and Conservation, Measure 1.14, Design Requirements for Covered Roads Outside of the UDA, of the ECCCHCP/NCCP incorporates avoidance guidelines for compliance with the MBTA.
Because the project would comply with all ECCCHCP/NCCP requirements, the project would also comply with the provisions of the MBTA.
Additionally, the proposed project would be subject to pay all applicable fees according to the Fee Zone Map of the ECCCHCP/NCCP prior to construction and in compliance with Section 9.2.712 of the Oakley Municipal Code. The developer would be required to pay the appropriate fees based on the applicable fee calculator at the time of development.
Conclusion
Based on the above, western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and other nesting migratory birds and raptors, have the potential to occur on-site. However, the project would comply with ECCCHCP/NCCP requirements, and pre-construction surveys would be required. The project would be required to comply with the ECCCHCP/NCCP’s Applicable Avoidance and Minimization Measures for western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and nesting and migratory birds. The proposed project would comply with all applicable ECCCHCP/NCCP requirements. Thus, the proposed project would not have an adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or the USFWS, nor conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. As such, a less-than-significant impact would result. b,c. The project site is currently planted as a vineyard and does not contain riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, including wetlands, or potentially jurisdictional waters of the State.15 Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect 14 East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan Association. Final East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan. October 2006. 15 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Available at:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. Accessed May 2023. 551
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
43 November 2023
on riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, or federally protected wetlands, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
d. The project site is located in an urbanized area and is developed with one single-family residence in the southern portion of the project site and one single-family residence, one ancillary shed, and one cell tower in the northeast corner of the site. The remainder of the parcel is planted as a vineyard with rows of grapevines. The project site is surrounded by residences to the north and west; a convenience store, gas station, and oil change to the east; and single-family residences and agricultural land to the south. Furthermore, according to the Cultural Resource Report and the Phase I ESA prepared for the project site,16 the project site has been used as agricultural land since at least 1939 and, therefore, has been subject to regular disturbance. The developed nature of the surrounding area precludes the use of the project site as a migratory corridor and, therefore, the project site and surrounding area are not anticipated to support any substantial wildlife movement corridors or wildlife nursery sites. As such, the project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
e. A Preliminary Arborist Report was prepared for the proposed project by Atlas Tree Service, Inc. (see Appendix D).17 As previously noted, 16 trees currently exist on the project site. Two non-native pines (Allepo pine and Italian stone pine) would be preserved and a total of 14 trees would be removed as part of the project, including 13 non-native trees and one native tree. The non-native trees consist primarily of Monterey pine, camphor, fruitless mulberry, and almond, and the native tree is a black walnut.
Section 9.1.1112 of the Municipal Code defines protected trees and heritage trees, and establishes requirements governing the removal of such. Section 9.1.1112 defines a protected tree as any tree adjacent to or part of a riparian habitat, foothill woodland, or oak savanna that measures 20 inches in circumference or larger and an indigenous tree that measures 40 inches in circumference or larger or as a California native oak that measures at least 50 inches in circumference (15.6 inches diameter). Section 9.1.1112 also requires that any protected trees that are to be removed shall be replaced. The Preliminary Arborist Report does not identify any of the on-site trees as heritage or protected trees.
Based on the above, none of the trees to be preserved or removed are classified as heritage or protected trees under Section 9.1.1112, and the proposed project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur. 16 Basics Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, California. May 2, 2023. 17 Atlas Tree Service, Inc. Arborist Report, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, CA 94561. September 16, 2022. 552
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
44 November 2023
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a unique archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries.
Discussion
The following discussion is primarily based on a Cultural Resources Study18 and Historic Evaluation19 (see Appendix E) prepared for the proposed project by Tom Origer & Associates (Origer). It is noted that the off-site improvement areas were not surveyed as all ground disturbance would occur within the existing ROW, where development has already occurred. a. The Cultural Resources Study consisted of a literature review to identify any previously recorded cultural resources and a field survey, conducted on May 18, 2023, of the entire project site. Origer conducted archival research to assess the potential to encounter archaeological sites and built environment within the study area. Origer also completed research to determine the potential for buried archaeological deposits. On August 23, 2022, Origer conducted a review of the archaeological site base maps and records, survey reports, and other materials on file at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), including the current listings of properties on the National Register of Historic Places, California Historical Landmarks, California Register of Historical Resources, and California Points of Historical Interest as listed in the OHP’s Historic Property Directory (2012) and the Built Environment Resources Directory (2022). Origer’s research determined that the project site has not been subject to any previous cultural studies and nine studies have been conducted within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site. Based on the previous studies conducted for the project area, cultural resources are not known to exist within 0.25-mile of the project site.
The intensive field survey included surface examination and excavation using a hoe. The field survey confirmed that a total of four structures exist within the project site: one singlefamily residence, an ancillary shed, and a cell tower in the northeast corner of the site, and one single-family residence on the southern portion of the site. The remainder of the project site is planted as a vineyard with rows of grapevines.
In order to determine whether the on-site structures and vineyard are historically significant, the structures would be required to undergo evaluation using the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) eligibility criteria.
18 Tom Origer & Associates. Cultural Resources Study of the Property at 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, Contra Costa County, California. June 9, 2023. 19 Tom Origer & Associates. The Results of an Historic Evaluation of the Property at 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, Contra Costa County. September 28, 2023.
553
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
45 November 2023
The NRHP and CRHR eligibility criteria include the following:
(1)/(A) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the U.S.;
(2)/(B) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history;
(3)/(C) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or
(4)/(D) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
In addition, the resources must retain integrity. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
The resource must be at least 50 years old, except in exceptional circumstances.
According to the Cultural Resources Study, the cell tower is modern and does not meet the age threshold for consideration as a historic resource. According to the Historic Evaluation, the property is associated with Ben Romiti and his family who grew wine grapes at the property for nearly 100 years; the existing vineyard on the property predates the ownership period of the Romiti family. The single-family residence in the northeast corner of the site was built in 1936 by Ben Romiti. County records indicate that the singlefamily residence located in the southern portion of the project site was constructed in 1967.
Therefore, the vineyard, 1936 residence, and 1967 residence meet the age threshold for consideration as historic resources.
While the 1967 single-family residence could be considered important under the context of post-World War II development, individual properties generally do not meet Criteria 1 of the CRHR because individual homes do not adequately convey associations with important post-World War II development. In addition, according to the Historic Evaluation, the 1967 residence is not considered to be an important building and does not meet criteria 2 of the CRHR. Furthermore, the residence is not architecturally distinct and does not meet Criteria 3 of the CRHR. According to the Cultural Resources Report, buildings do not generally meet Criteria 4 of the CRHR. Based on the above, Origer determined that the 1967 residence is not considered eligible for listing under the CRHR. Based on the above, the following discussion focuses on the eligibility of the 1936 residence and vineyard for inclusion on the CRHR.
According to the Historic Evaluation, the project site is associated with viticulture, which played a major role in Contra Costa County’s agricultural development. Given the longevity and endurance of the vineyard at the project site, Origer determined that the existing vineyard is exemplary of a small vineyard in Contra Costa County; therefore, the vineyard is eligible for the CRHR under Criteria 1.
While Ben Romiti was well known and well respected in the Oakley community, archival research conducted by Origer does not indicate that Ben Romiti was a particularly significant individual on his own merits; rather it was the contributions of the Romiti family that made an impact on the Oakley community. Therefore, the 1936 residence built by Ben Romiti is not eligible for inclusion on the CRHR under Criteria 2. 554
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
46 November 2023
With the exception of the windows, which were replaced, the original construction of the 1936 residence has been retained. According to Origer, the 1936 residence is a good example of a simple Great Depression-era farmhouse in the Oakley vicinity. Therefore, the 1936 residence is eligible for inclusion on the CRHR under Criteria 3.
Criteria 4 generally applies to archaeological resources or resources that, through the study of construction details, can provide information that cannot be obtained in other ways. The 1936 residence and vineyard do not possess intrinsic qualities that could provide important information in history or prehistory. Therefore, the 1936 residence and vineyard are not eligible for inclusion on the CRHR under Criteria 4.
In order to meet the necessary criteria for inclusion on the CRHR, a property must also retain sufficient integrity to convey significance. While the property retains integrity of location, materials, and association, the property does not retain integrity of design, setting, or feeling; the integrity element of workmanship does not apply. Typically, a property should retain most, if not all, of the integrity considerations to be listed on the CRHR. While the project site retains integrity of association, which is an important integrity consideration for a property to be listed under Criteria 1, the degradation of the element of setting and the alterations to the project site affect the element of design and preclude the project site from retaining sufficient integrity to convey significance.
Therefore, Origer concluded that the project site, including the 1936 residence and vineyard, is not eligible for inclusion on the CRHR because the property does not retain the integrity of design, setting, and feeling necessary to reflect a small agricultural property in the vicinity of the City of Oakley.
Based on the above, development of the site would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b,c. As noted above, Origer conducted a record search at the NWIC as part of the Cultural Resources Study. The search concluded that the project site has a moderate potential for identifying historic-period archaeological resources in the project area. However, the field survey did not indicate the presence of any archaeological resources. On May 31, 2023, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conducted a records search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) which indicated that archaeological and other cultural resources are not known to be present in the project vicinity.
According to the Cultural Resources Study, the project site is underlain by Holocene-age dune sands. Given that the project area dates to the Holocene Epoch (11,700 years ago to the present), the Cultural Resources Study determined that a moderate potential exists for buried resources to occur within the project site. While the project site has been subject to ground disturbance associated with past development and agricultural activities, unknown archaeological resources, including human remains, have the potential to be uncovered during future ground-disturbing construction and excavation activities at the subject property. If previously unknown resources are encountered during construction activities, the proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and/or disturb human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. Therefore, a potentially significant impact could occur. 555
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
47 November 2023
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
V-1. If buried archaeological, paleontological, and/or cultural resources are encountered during site grading or other site work, all such work shall be halted immediately within 100 feet of the discovery and the developer shall immediately notify the City of Oakley Planning Division of the discovery. In such case, the developer shall be required, at their own expense, to retain the services of a qualified archaeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, or curating the discovery, as appropriate. The archaeologist shall be required to submit to the City of Oakley Planning Division for review and approval a report of the findings and method of curation or protection of the resources. Further grading or site work within the area of discovery would not be allowed until the preceding work has occurred.
The foregoing requirements shall be noted on the project improvement plans and disclosed to any subcontractors by the general contractor or job superintendent during pre-construction meetings, subject to review and approval by the City of Oakley Planning Division.
V-2. Pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 (c) State Public Resources Code §5097.98, if human bone or bone of unknown origin is found during construction, all work shall stop within 100 feet of the find and the Contra Costa County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall notify the person believed to be the most likely descendant. The most likely descendant shall work with the contractor to develop a program for re-internment of the human remains and any associated artifacts. Additional work is not to take place within 100 feet of the find until the identified appropriate actions have been implemented.
The foregoing requirements shall be noted on the project improvement plans and disclosed to any subcontractors by the general contractor or job superintendent during pre-construction meetings, subject to review and approval of compliance by the City of Oakley Planning Division. 556
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
48 November 2023
VI. ENERGY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Discussion
a,b. The main forms of available energy supply are electricity, natural gas, and oil. A description of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and the City’s Strategic Energy Plan (SEP), with which the proposed project would be required to comply, as well as discussions regarding the proposed project’s potential effects related to energy demand during construction and operations, are provided below.
California Green Building Standards Code
The 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, otherwise known as the CALGreen Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11), is a portion of the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), which became effective with the rest of the CBSC on January 1, 2023. 20 The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices. The provisions of the code apply to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure throughout California. Requirements of the CALGreen Code include, but are not limited to, the following measures:
• Compliance with relevant regulations related to future installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in residential and non-residential structures; • Indoor water use consumption is reduced through the establishment of maximum fixture water use rates;
• Outdoor landscaping must comply with the California Department of Water Resources’ MWELO, or a local ordinance, whichever is more stringent, to reduce outdoor water use;
• Diversion of 65 percent of construction and demolition waste from landfills; • Incentives for installation of electric heat pumps, which use less energy than traditional heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and water heaters;
• Required solar PV system and battery storage standards for certain buildings; and • Mandatory use of low-pollutant emitting interior finish materials such as paints, carpet, vinyl flooring, and particle board.
Building Energy Efficiency Standards
The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards is a portion of the CBSC, which expands upon energy-efficiency measures from the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, 20 California Building Standards Commission. 2022 California Green Building Standards Code. 2023. 557
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
49 November 2023
went into effect starting January 1, 2023. The 2022 standards provide for additional efficiency improvements beyond the 2019 standards. The proposed project would be subject to all relevant provisions of the most recent update of the CBSC, including the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Adherence to the most recent CALGreen Code and Building Energy Efficiency Standards would ensure that the proposed structure would consume energy efficiently.
Strategic Energy Plan
In the fall of 2015, the City of Oakley adopted a SEP to help meet State mandates for required energy use and GHG emission reductions.21 The SEP included six energy planning goals and priorities, including, but not limited to, improving energy performance to exceed Title 24 requirements for new construction and major renovations of the City facilities; exploring opportunities for energy efficiency, demand reduction, and/or clean self-generation measures; and exploring existing economic and fiscal criteria commonly used for the evaluation and implementation of energy use reduction and energy generation strategies.
Construction Energy Use
Construction of the proposed project would involve on-site energy demand and consumption related to use of oil in the form of gasoline and diesel fuel for construction worker vehicle trips, hauling and materials delivery truck trips, and operation of off-road construction equipment. In addition, diesel-fueled portable generators may be necessary to provide additional electricity demands for temporary on-site lighting, welding, and for supplying energy to areas of the site where energy supply cannot be met via a hookup to the existing electricity grid. Even during the most intense period of construction, due to the different types of construction activities (e.g., site preparation, grading, building construction), only portions of the project site and off-site improvement areas would be disturbed at a time, with operation of construction equipment occurring at different locations on the project site, rather than a single location. Project construction would not involve the use of natural gas appliances or equipment.
All construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated by the CARB’s InUse Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation is intended to reduce emissions from in-use, off-road, heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California by imposing limits on idling, requiring all vehicles to be reported to CARB, restricting the addition of older vehicles into fleets, and requiring fleets to reduce emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines, or installing exhaust retrofits. In addition, as a means of reducing emissions, construction vehicles are required to become cleaner through the use of renewable energy resources. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation would therefore help to improve fuel efficiency for equipment used in construction of the proposed project. Technological innovations and more stringent standards are being researched, such as multi-function equipment, hybrid equipment, or other design changes, which could help to further reduce demand on oil and limit emissions associated with construction.
Based on the above, the temporary increase in energy use occurring during construction of the proposed project would not result in a significant increase in peak or base demands or require additional capacity from local or regional energy supplies. In addition, construction activities would be required to comply with all applicable regulations related 21 City of Oakley. Strategic Energy Plan. Fall 2015.
558
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
50 November 2023
to energy conservation and fuel efficiency, which would help to reduce the temporary increase in demand.
Operational Energy Use
Following implementation of the proposed project, PG&E would provide electricity to the project site. Energy use associated with operation of the proposed project would be typical of residential uses, requiring electricity for interior and exterior building lighting, HVAC, electronic equipment, machinery, refrigeration, appliances, security systems, and more.
Maintenance activities during operations, such as landscape maintenance, would involve the use of electric or gas-powered equipment. In addition to on-site energy use, the proposed project would result in transportation energy use associated with vehicle trips generated by the proposed residential development. It should be noted that, as required by Mitigation Measure VIII-1 in this IS/MND, natural gas infrastructure would be prohibited in the proposed residences.
The proposed residential project would be subject to all relevant provisions of the most recent update of the CBSC, including the Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Adherence to the most recent CALGreen Code and the Building Energy Efficiency Standards would ensure that the proposed structures would consume energy efficiently through the incorporation of such features as efficient water heating systems, high performance attics and walls, and high efficacy lighting. Required compliance with the CBSC would ensure that the building energy use associated with the proposed project would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. In addition, electricity supplied to the project site by PG&E would comply with the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires investor-owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 and to 60 percent by 2030. Thus, a portion of the energy consumed during operation of the proposed project would originate from renewable sources.
The CARB prepared the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan),22 which builds upon previous efforts to reduce GHG emissions and is designed to continue to shift the California economy away from dependence on fossil fuels. Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan provides suggestions for prioritizing various types of mitigation, such as on-site GHG-reducing design features and mitigation measures. Appendix D includes the methods to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), support building decarbonization, and provide access to shared mobility services or transit, as well as EV charging. Appendix D provides further suggestions for prioritizing other mitigation types, including non-local off-site mitigation, and voluntary offsets issued by a recognized and reputable voluntary carbon registry. The regulation described above, with which the proposed project must comply, would be consistent with the intention of the 2022 Scoping Plan and the recommended actions included in Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan.
Additionally, the proposed project would be consistent with the goals of the SEP, as the proposed project would comply with the latest CBSC standards regarding energy conservation, renewable energy resources, and green building standards. 22 California Air Resources Board. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. November 16, 2022. 559
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
51 November 2023
With regard to transportation energy use, the proposed project would comply with all applicable regulations associated with vehicle efficiency and fuel economy. In addition, as discussed in Section XVII, Transportation, of this Initial Study, the project site is not anticipated to substantially increase VMT. Furthermore, the Tri-Delta Transit provides transit services in the City of Oakley, with three lines connecting Brentwood and the Pittsburg/Bay Point Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station. Transit would provide access to several grocery stores, restaurants, banks, and schools within close proximity to the project site. The site’s access to public transit and proximity to bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as existing sidewalks along Oakley Road, Main Street, and Empire Avenue, would reduce VMT and, consequently, fuel consumption associated with the proposed single-family residences.
Conclusion
Based on the above, construction and operations of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Thus, a lessthan-significant impact would occur. 560
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
52 November 2023
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
Discussion
ai-ii. The project site does not contain any active or potentially active faults, nor is the site located within a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone.23 However, according to the City’s General Plan EIR, the City of Oakley is subject to seismic risk because the City is within the San Francisco Bay Area, an area of high seismicity.24 According to the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the proposed project by BAEZ Geotechnical Group (see Appendix F), 25 the project site is not located within a seismic hazard zone mapped for earthquake faults by the California Geological Survey. Therefore, it is unlikely for surface fault rupture to occur at the site. Furthermore, proper engineering 23 California Geologic Survey. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Brentwood 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Contra Costa County, California. 2018. 24 City of Oakley. City of Oakley 2020 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report [pg. 3-161]. September 2002. 25 BAEZ Geotechnical Group. Geotechnical Investigation, Paseo Residential Subdivision, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, California. November 9, 2022.
561
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
53 November 2023
of the proposed buildings in compliance with the CBSC would ensure that the proposed project would not be subject to substantial risks related to seismic ground shaking.
Projects designed in accordance with the CBSC should be able to: 1) resist minor earthquakes without damage, 2) resist moderate earthquakes without structural damage but with some nonstructural damage, and 3) resist major earthquakes without collapse but with some structural as well as nonstructural damage. Conformance with the CBSC design standards would be enforced through building plan review and require approval by the City.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault or strong seismic ground shaking. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
aiii,aiv, The proposed project’s potential effects related to liquefaction, subsidence/settlement, landslides, lateral spreading, and expansive soil are discussed in detail below.
Liquefaction and Subsidence/Settlement
Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of loose, saturated granular sediments from a solid state to a liquefied state as a result of seismic ground shaking. In the process, the soil undergoes transient loss of strength, which commonly causes ground displacement or ground failure to occur. Because saturated soils are a necessary condition for liquefaction, soil layers in areas where the groundwater table is near the surface have higher liquefaction potential than those in which the water table is located at greater depths. Additionally, loose unsaturated sandy soils have the potential to settle during strong seismic shaking. Liquefaction can often result in subsidence, which refers to the gradual settling or sudden sinking of land surface, or settlement, which refers to the vertical movement of soil when a load is applied to the surface.
The project site is located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction.26 According to the MTC/ABAG Hazard Viewer Map, project site is located within a “Moderate” Earthquake Liquefaction Susceptibility zone.27 An evaluation of liquefaction hazards of settlement, lateral spreading, and surface ground rupture, as well as dry sand settlement of the soil above the water table were conducted by BAEZ Geotechnical Group and consisted of previous cone penetration test data using mapped historical high groundwater levels of 20 feet and 25 feet below ground surface, and an expected earthquake magnitude of 7.0. Based upon the analysis, an estimated one inch of liquefaction-induced settlement may occur at the site as a result of a strong seismic event. However, the Geotechnical Investigation determined that total seismically induced ground settlement would not impact the surface improvements associated with the proposed project because the settlement would likely occur over the general area.
Differential settlement could impact surface structures due to the increased amount of potential combined seismic and static differential settlement for the structures. Overall, the Geotechnical Investigation determined that potential impacts to surface improvements from lateral spreading and surface disturbance would be negligible. However, due to the potential for liquefaction to occur on-site, foundation subsidence or settlement may occur, and, without the implementation of mitigation, an impact could occur. 26 California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed June 2023. 27 Association of Bay Area Governments. Hazard Viewer. Available at: https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience/dataresearch/hazard-viewer/. Accessed June 2023. c,d.
562
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
54 November 2023
Landslides
Seismically-induced landslides are triggered by earthquake ground shaking. The risk of landslide hazard is greatest in areas with steep, unstable slopes. The project site is relatively flat and is not located near any slopes. Therefore, the proposed project would not be subject to landslide risks and would not expose people or structures to potential risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides.
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading involves horizontal/lateral ground movement of relatively flat-lying soil deposits towards a free face such as an excavation, channel, or open body of water; typically, lateral spreading is associated with liquefaction of one or more subsurface layers near the bottom of the exposed slope. Given that the project site does not contain, and is not adjacent to, any free faces including excavations, channels, or open bodies of water, lateral spreading would not present a likely hazard at the site.
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils can undergo significant volume changes with variations in moisture content. Specifically, such soils shrink and harden when dried and expand and soften when wetted. If structures are underlain by expansive soils, foundation systems must be capable of withstanding the potential damaging movements of the soil.
Pursuant to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the project site is comprised entirely of Delhi sand with two to nine percent slopes, which has a shrink-swell numerical rating of 0.12. The numerical ratings indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the use (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation (0.00). Therefore, the potential exists for expansive soils to exist on site and adversely affect the proposed project.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the proposed project would not be subject to substantial risks related to landslides, or lateral spreading. However, the potential exists for liquefaction and associated subsidence/settlement, or expansive soils to occur at the project site. Without implementation of mitigation, the proposed project could cause substantial adverse effects related to such. Thus, a potentially significant impact could occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above impact to a less-than-significant level.
VII-1. Prior to approval of any grading permits, the project Civil Engineer shall show on the project plans that the project design adheres to all engineering recommendations provided in the site-specific Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the proposed project by BAEZ Geotechnical Group. Proof of compliance with all recommendations specified in the Geotechnical Investigation shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
The project plans shall include, but not be limited to, engineering recommendations related to site preparation and grading, utility trench excavation, backfill, foundations, concrete slab-on-grade floors, exterior 563
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
55 November 2023
concrete flatwork, retaining walls, pavement areas, and project review and construction monitoring.
The site demolition activities shall also specify that any underground structures, such as abandoned irrigation lines, septic tanks, and leach fields, encountered during demolition and construction shall be properly removed, all excavations left open for backfilling, and loose material created by the demolition of existing structures should be excavated and replaced as engineered fill.
b. During construction activities, topsoil would be exposed following site grading and prior to constructing building foundations. As a result, the potential for topsoil erosion would exist.
Following development of the site, all exposed soils would be covered with impervious surfaces or landscaping and, thus, the potential for erosion to occur would not exist longterm.
As discussed further under questions ‘ci’ and ‘ciii’ in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND, pursuant to the City of Oakley Municipal Code Sections 6.9.308 and 6.11.212, preparation of an Erosion Control Plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to construction activities and implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction is required. The erosion control measures required by both the SWPPP and the Erosion Control Plan would ensure that the proposed project would not result in substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and a less-thansignificant impact would occur. e. The proposed project would connect to existing City sewer services. Thus, the construction or operation of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems would not be included as part of the project. Therefore, no impact regarding the capability of soil to adequately support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur.
f. The City’s General Plan does not note the existence of any unique geologic features within the City. Consequently, implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to result in direct or indirect destruction of unique geologic features.
The City’s General Plan indicates that few paleontological resources are known to occur within the City Planning Area.28 In addition, portions of the surrounding area are developed and paleontological resources have not been encountered in the vicinity. Thus, existing paleontological resources are not expected to occur on the site. Nonetheless, the potential exists for previously unknown paleontological resources could exist within the project site.
Ground-disturbing activity such as grading, trenching, or excavating associated with implementation of the proposed project would have the potential to disturb or destroy such resources if present. Therefore, the proposed project could result in the direct or indirect destruction of a unique paleontological resource, and a potentially significant impact could occur.
28 City of Oakley. City of Oakley General Plan, Focused General Plan Update [pg. 6-19]. Adopted January 11, 2022. 564
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
56 November 2023
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above impact to a less-than-significant level.
VII-1. Implement Mitigation Measures V-1 and V-2.
565
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
57 November 2023
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gasses?
Discussion
a,b. Emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change are attributable in large part to human activities associated with the industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors. Therefore, the cumulative global emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change can be attributed to every nation, region, and city, and virtually every individual on Earth. An individual project’s GHG emissions are at a micro-scale level relative to global emissions and effects to global climate change; however, an individual project could result in a cumulatively considerable incremental contribution to a significant cumulative macro-scale impact. As such, impacts related to emissions of GHG are inherently considered cumulative impacts.
Implementation of the proposed project would cumulatively contribute to increases of GHG emissions. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to future development would be primarily associated with increases of carbon dioxide (CO2) and, to a lesser extent, other GHG pollutants, such as methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) associated with area sources, mobile sources or vehicles, utilities (electricity), water usage, wastewater generation, and the generation of solid waste. The primary source of GHG emissions for the project would be mobile source emissions. The common unit of measurement for GHG is expressed in terms of annual metric tons of CO2 equivalents (MTCO2e/yr).
The proposed project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of BAAQMD. The most recent BAAQMD Air Quality Guidelines were released in April 2023.29 The updated GHG thresholds address more recent climate change legislation, including SB 32, and provide qualitative thresholds related to Buildings and Transportation.
Construction GHG emissions are a one-time release and are, therefore, not typically expected to generate a significant contribution to global climate change. Neither the City nor BAAQMD has an adopted threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions and does not require quantification. Nonetheless, the proposed project’s construction GHG emissions, as well as operational emissions, have been estimated using CalEEMod under the same assumptions discussed in Section III, Air Quality, of this IS (see Appendix A). The emissions estimates prepared for the proposed project determined that unmitigated construction of the project would result in total GHG emissions of 398 MTCO2e over the entire construction period.
Potential impacts related to operational GHG emissions resulting from implementation of the proposed project are considered in comparison with BAAQMD’s adopted thresholds of significance below.
29 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023. 566
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
58 November 2023
BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
The BAAQMD’s adopted thresholds of significance for GHG emissions are qualitative, and address recent climate change legislation, including SB 32. According to the new thresholds of significance, a project must either include specific project design elements (e.g., exclude use of natural gas, achieve a specific reduction in project-generated VMT below the regional average) or be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).30 The City of Oakley does not have a GHG reduction strategy under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). Therefore, the following analysis focuses on the new BAAQMD GHG thresholds related to specific project design elements.
According to the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance, in order to find a less-thansignificant GHG impact, projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements:
1. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development);
2. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines;
3. The project will achieve a reduction in project-generated VMT below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted SB 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s “Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA”; and
4. The project will achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2.
In order to be consistent with the first criterion, the proposed project would be required to include all electric appliances and plumbing. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards requires that new development be built electric-ready (i.e., structures will be required to have electric supply panels and circuitry to support all-electric appliances and heating). Mitigation would be required to ensure that the proposed project would not include the use of natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing and, thus, would comply with the first criterion.
Regarding the second criterion, as discussed in Section VI, Energy, of this IS/MND, the proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations regarding energy use during both project construction and project operations. Therefore, as discussed therein, the proposed project would not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage.
With respect to the third criterion, as discussed in Section XVII, Transportation, of this IS/MND, the citywide VMT per capita was calculated to be 26.76, and, as a result, the impact threshold of 15 percent below the Citywide average VMT per capita equates to
22.75 VMT per capita. The project is projected to generate VMT per capita of 19.09.
Therefore, the project would achieve a 15 percent reduction in project-generated VMT 30 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023. 567
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
59 November 2023
below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan.
With respect to the fourth criterion, the proposed project would be subject to the singlefamily residential requirements set forth in the CALGreen standards. Per the 2022 CALGreen Code, single-family residential projects are required to install a listed raceway to accommodate a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit for each unit, which would be suitable for EV charging. Compliance with this requirement would be sufficient to comply with the Tier 2 CALGreen standards, as required by BAAQMD.
As previously noted, the CARB prepared the 2022 Scoping Plan, which builds upon previous efforts to reduce GHG emissions and is designed to continue to shift the California economy away from dependence on fossil fuels. Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan provides suggestions for prioritizing various types of mitigation, such as onsite GHG-reducing design features and mitigation measures. Similar to the 2022 Scoping Plan, BAAQMD identified the necessary design elements required of new land use projects and plans being built today in order to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. If these design elements are incorporated into the design and construction of a project, then the project would contribute its portion of what is necessary to achieve California’s long-term climate goals— its “fair share”—and a lead agency reviewing the project under CEQA can conclude that the project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change.
Based on the above, BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance are consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Therefore, if a development project is consistent with BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance, it can be assumed that the project would also be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Given that the proposed project would not be consistent with BAAQMD’s required thresholds of significance without implementation of mitigation, the proposed project would conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan.
Conclusion
Based on the above, without the implementation of mitigation, the project may not comply with the BAAQMD’s required thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed project could generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, or could conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Thus, a potentially significant impact could occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
VIII-1. Consistent with the BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance, prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed project, the project applicant shall demonstrate via project design and/or notation included on project design that natural gas infrastructure shall be prohibited. Natural gas infrastructure may be allowed if the applicant implements alternative methods that reduce the project’s greenhouse gas emissions in an equally effective or superior manner as would exist without natural gas emission infrastructure. 568
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
60 November 2023
Conformance with the foregoing requirement shall be confirmed through review and approval of building permit plans by the City of Oakley Planning Division.
569
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
61 November 2023
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the likely release
of hazardous materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Discussion
a. A significant hazard to the public or the environment could result from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Future operations of the proposed residences on the project site could involve the use of common household cleaning products, fertilizers, and herbicides on-site, any of which could contain potentially hazardous chemicals; however, such products would be expected to be used in accordance with label instructions. Due to the regulations governing use of such products and the amount that could reasonably be used on the site, routine use of such products would not represent a substantial risk to public health or the environment. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b. A development project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment should a site contain potential Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) that are not properly addressed prior to project implementation. A REC indicates the presence or likely presence of any hazardous 570
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
62 November 2023
substances in, on, or at a property due to any release into the environment, under conditions indicative of a release to the environment, or under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.31 The following discussion provides an analysis of potential hazards related to the proposed construction activities and the project’s potential to exacerbate any existing on-site hazardous conditions. The analysis of existing on-site hazardous conditions is based on a Phase I ESA conducted for the proposed project by Basics Environmental (see Appendix G).
32 Construction Activities
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would involve the use of heavy equipment, which would contain fuels and oils, and the use of other products such as concrete, paints, and adhesives. Small quantities of potentially toxic substances (e.g., petroleum and other chemicals used to operate and maintain construction equipment) would be used at the project site and transported to and from the site during construction.
However, the project contractor would be required to comply with all California Health and Safety Codes and local City ordinances regulating the handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous and toxic materials. Thus, construction of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Existing On-Site Hazardous Conditions
A discussion of potential on-site hazardous conditions related to contaminated soils, septic systems and/or wells, and hazardous building materials is discussed below.
Contaminated Soils
The project site has been historically used for agricultural activities, such as vineyards, since at least 1939. Past agricultural activities within the subject property may have included the use of pesticides and arsenic. In addition, building maintenance may have included the application of persistent pesticides (termiticides) around the foundation of former and existing structures to prevent pest invasions. Contaminated soils can leach toxic chemicals into nearby ground or surface waters, where these materials can be taken up by plants and animals, contaminate a human drinking water supply, or volatilize and contaminate the indoor air in overlying buildings.33 Accordingly, the Phase I ESA determined that the potential exists for residual levels of persistent agricultural chemicals to remain in the soil.
Septic Systems and/or Wells
Because the project site is currently developed with two residences, an ancillary shed, and a cell tower, the potential exists for a well or septic field associated with the residences to be uncovered during construction. Failing or older septic systems are likely to discharge untreated wastewater, which contain pathogens, nutrients, and other harmful substances 31 ASTM International. ASTM E1527, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. 2013. 32 Basics Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, California. May 2, 2023. 33 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Contaminated Land. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/reportenvironment/contaminated-land. Accessed June 2023. 571
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
63 November 2023
directly into the groundwater or onto the ground and into surface waters.34 In addition, wells carry the potential to be contaminated by both naturally occurring sources and by human activities, with contaminants potentially released into the environment through ground-disturbing construction activities in the event that on-site wells are disrupted.35 Proper abandonment and removal of the facilities would be required prior to construction.
Thus, without proper abandonment, a significant impact could occur.
Hazardous Building Materials
Asbestos is the name for a group of naturally occurring silicate minerals that are considered to be “fibrous” and, through processing, can be separated into smaller and smaller fibers. The fibers are strong, durable, chemical resistant, and resistant to heat and fire. They are also long, thin, and flexible, such that they can be woven into cloth. Because of the above qualities, asbestos was considered an ideal product and has been used in thousands of consumer, industrial, maritime, automotive, scientific, and building products.
However, later discoveries found that, when inhaled, the material caused serious illness.
For buildings constructed prior to 1980, the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR 1926.1101) states that all thermal system insulation (boiler insulation, pipe lagging, and related materials) and surface materials must be designated as “presumed asbestoscontaining material” unless proven otherwise through sampling in accordance with the standards of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act. Because the existing onsite residences were constructed between the 1930s and the 1970’s, the potential exists that asbestos-containing materials were used in the construction of the residential structures and the barn. Thus, the proposed project could potentially expose construction workers to asbestos during demolition of the structures, and a significant impact could occur.
Federal guidelines define lead-based paint (LBP) as any paint, varnish, stain, or other applied coating that has one milligram of lead per square centimeter or greater. Lead is a highly toxic material that may cause a range of serious illnesses, and in some cases death.
In buildings constructed after 1978, the presence of LBP is unlikely. Structures built prior to 1978, and especially prior to the 1960s, are expected to contain LBP. Given that the existing structures on the property were constructed before the phase-out of LBPs in the 1970s, the proposed project could potentially expose construction workers to LBP during demolition of the structures. Thus, a significant impact could occur during demolition of the on-site structures.
Furthermore, caulk containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were commonly used in building construction practices between 1950 and 1970 and, thus, may be present in the existing single-family residence in the southern portion of the site. Finally, the existing structures may include items that contain mercury, such as gas pressure regulators or thermostats. Therefore, demolition of the on-site structures could present a potential hazard risk related to LBP, asbestos, PCB-containing caulk, or mercury. However, it should be noted that the project site has not been subject to past uses that would lead to site-specific lead contamination in soils and, as a result, testing for lead in on-site soils is not warranted.
34 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Septic System Impacts on Water Sources. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/septic/septic-system-impacts-water-sources. Accessed June 2023. 35 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Overview of Water-related Diseases and Contaminants in Private Wells. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/private/wells/diseases.html. Accessed June 2023. 572
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
64 November 2023
Conclusion
Based on the above, the potential exists for persistent pesticides and arsenic in on-site soils, existing septic systems and/or water wells, asbestos-containing materials, LBPs, and PCB-containing caulk or mercury associated with the existing structures to occur.
Therefore, the proposed project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment, and a potentially significant impact could occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
IX-1. Prior to initiation of construction activities on the proposed project site, the project applicant shall complete an analysis of on-site soils to determine whether substantial concentrations of organochloride pesticides, arsenic, or other soil contaminants are present above the applicable direct exposure Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) set by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the residential screening levels set by the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s Human Health Risk Assessment Note 3, and/or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Regional Screening Levels for Region 9. If contaminants are not detected above applicable ESLs/RSLs, then further mitigation is not required. If contaminants are detected above the applicable ESLs/RSLs, then the soils shall be remediated by off-hauling to a licensed landfill facility. Such remediation activities shall be performed by a licensed hazardous waste contractor (Class A) and contractor personnel that have completed 40-hour OSHA hazardous training.
Impacted soils shall be managed in accordance with the recommendations of applicable federal, State, and local standards, to the satisfaction of the City of Oakley and the Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division.
The results of soil sampling and analysis, as well as verification of proper remediation and disposal, shall be submitted to the City of Oakley Planning Division for review and approval.
IX-2. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit by the City for any on-site structures, the project applicant shall provide a site assessment that determines whether any structures to be demolished contain lead-based paint (LBP), asbestos, mercury, or polychlorinated biphenyl caulk.
Sampling shall be conducted in accordance with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s 2006 Interim Guidance Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Contamination from Lead based Paint, Termiticides, and Electrical Transformers. If structures do not contain the aforementioned chemicals, further mitigation is not required; however, if LBP is found, all loose and peeling paint shall be removed and disposed of by a licensed and certified lead paint removal contractor, in accordance with CARB recommendations and OSHA requirements. If asbestos is found, all construction activities shall comply with all requirements and regulations promulgated through the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). The demolition contractor shall be informed that all paint on the buildings shall be considered as containing 573
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
65 November 2023
lead and/or asbestos. The contractor shall follow all work practice standards set forth in the Asbestos National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (Asbestos NESHAP, 40 CFR, Part 61, Subpart M) regulations, as well as Section V, Chapter 3 of the OSHA Technical Manual. Should mercury or polychlorinated biphenyl caulk be detected, the removal, demolition, and disposal of such chemicals shall be conducted in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. Work practice standards generally include appropriate precautions to protect construction workers and the surrounding community, and appropriate disposal methods for construction waste containing lead paint or asbestos in accordance with federal, State, and local regulations subject to approval by the City Engineer.
IX-3. During ground-disturbing activities, if one or more wells and/or septic systems are identified on-site, the project applicant shall hire a licensed contractor to obtain the applicable abandonment permit from Contra Costa County Environmental Health Division (CCCEHD), and properly abandon the on-site wells and/or septic systems for review and approval by the CCCEHD and the City of Oakley Planning Division.
c. The nearest school relative to the project site is Orchard Park School, which is located approximately 1,570 feet (0.29-mile) northwest of the site. In addition, residential developments do not typically include the use of or emission of hazardous materials.
Therefore, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and no impact would occur. d. The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) has compiled a list of data resources that provide information regarding the facilities or sites identified as meeting the “Cortese List” requirements, pursuant to Government Code 65962.5. The components of the Cortese List include the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List,36 the list of leaking underground storage tank (UST) sites from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB’s) GeoTracker database,37 the list of solid waste disposal sites identified by the SWRCB, and the list of active Cease and Desist Orders (CDO) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAO) from the SWRCB.38 According to the Phase I ESA, the project site is listed on the County and the Cal EPA’s California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) databases and is listed with the County as a site utilizing unspecified hazardous material since 2017. The project site has a current permit to operate the cell tower and as part of the on-site operations, an approximately 16.64-gallon backup battery and approximately 132-gallon diesel fuel aboveground storage tank is utilized for the emergency back-up generator. Inspections were conducted in 2017, 2019, and 2021 by the CCCHSA and the site has not had any major violations or spills. Reports of spills or unauthorized releases have not been at the 36 Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed June 2023. 37 State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cqid=8858350455. Accessed June 2023. 38 CalEPA. Cortese List Data Resources. Available at: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. Accessed June 2023.
574
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
66 November 2023
site. Furthermore, according to the Phase I ESA, the project site is not included on the DTSC Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List, SWRCB’s list of solid waste disposal sites, list of leaking UST sites, or list of active CDO and CAO.
Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment related to being located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and a less-thansignificant impact would occur. e. The nearest airport to the project site is the Byron Airport, located approximately 12.64 miles southeast of the project site. Therefore, the project site is not located within two miles of any public airports and does not fall within an airport land use plan area.
Accordingly, no impact would occur related to a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.
f. During construction of the proposed project, all construction equipment would be staged on-site so as to prevent obstruction of local and regional travel routes in the City that could be used as evacuation routes during emergency events.
Emergency vehicle access would be provided by the new driveway off of Oakley Road and a new 21-foot-wide emergency vehicle access-only driveway off of Main Street, which would connect to the internal roadway in the northeastern corner of the site. Removable bollards would be installed as part of the northern most emergency vehicle access driveway and the EVA driveway would not be accessible to the general public. The new internal circulation system would ensure that the proposed residences would not interfere with potential evacuation or response routes used by emergency response teams during operations.
The project would also include off-site improvements to install a new storm drain line in Main Street, install a water line tie-in within Oakley Road, and widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes. The implementation of the off-site improvements would directly influence the transportation network near the site during construction, and could result in roadway or lane closures that adversely affect residents in the project area.
Based on the above, the project would not substantially alter the existing circulation system in the surrounding area. However, without proper planning of construction activities, construction traffic could interfere with existing roadway operations during the construction phase, which could impair the implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, project traffic related to construction activities could result in a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
IX-4. Prior to issuance of demolition or grading permits, the project applicant shall prepare and submit a Traffic Control Plan to the City for review and approval. The Traffic Control Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer:
575
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
67 November 2023
• Truck drivers shall be notified of and required to use the most direct route between the site and SR 4, as determined by the City Engineering Department;
• All site ingress and egress shall occur only at the main driveways to the project site and construction activities may require installation of temporary (or ultimate) traffic signals as determined by the City Engineer;
• Specifically-designated travel routes for large vehicles shall be monitored and controlled by flaggers for large construction vehicle ingress and egress;
• Warning signs indicating frequent truck entry and exit shall be posted on Oakley Road and Main Street;
• Any debris and mud on nearby streets caused by trucks shall be monitored daily and may require instituting a street cleaning program;
• Construction employee parking shall be provided on the project site to eliminate conflicts with nearby areas. Construction of the project shall be staggered so that employee parking demand is met primarily by using on-site parking; and
• If importation and exportation of material becomes a traffic nuisance, the City Engineer shall limit the hours the activities can take place.
g. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the project site is not located within a Very High or High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ).
39 Furthermore, the existing roadways in the
project vicinity would act as fire breaks and would reduce the risk for the uncontrolled spread of wildland fires. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, and a less-thansignificant impact would occur. 39 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. January 7, 2009.
576
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
68 November 2023
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site; ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or offsite;
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Discussion
a, The following discussion provides a summary of the proposed project’s potential to violate ci-ciii. water quality standards/waste discharge requirements, alter the drainage pattern of the site resulting in erosion or siltation, increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or otherwise degrade water quality during construction and operation.
Construction
During the early stages of construction activities, topsoil would be exposed due to grading and excavation of the site. After grading and prior to overlaying the ground with impervious surfaces and structures, the potential exists for wind and water to discharge sediment and/or urban pollutants into stormwater runoff, which could adversely affect water quality.
The SWRCB regulates stormwater discharges associated with construction activities where clearing, grading, or excavation results in land disturbance of one or more acres.
The City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requires applicants to show proof of coverage under the State’s General Construction Permit prior 577
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
69 November 2023
to receipt of any construction permits. The State’s General Construction Permit requires a SWPPP to be prepared for the site. A SWPPP describes BMPs to control or minimize pollutants from entering stormwater and must address both grading/erosion impacts and non-point source pollution impacts of the development project. Because the proposed project would disturb greater than one acre of land, the proposed project would be subject to the requirements of the State’s General Construction Permit and, with implementation of the required SWPPP and BMPs included therein, construction of the proposed project would not result in a violation of water quality standards and/or degradation of water quality.
Furthermore, per Municipal Code Sections 6.9.306 and 6.9.404, the proposed project would be required to submit an erosion and sediment control plan with submittal of the grading permit application to ensure water quality is not degraded. The plan would include erosion and sediment control measures that would be implemented during grading and would be approved by the City Engineer. Given the required submittal and approval of a SWPPP and erosion and sediment control plan, the proposed project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality during construction.
Operations
Following project buildout, the surface of the site would be covered with either impervious surfaces or landscaped areas, and topsoil would no longer be exposed. As such, the potential for erosion and associated impacts to water quality would be reduced. However, the addition of impervious surfaces on the site would result in the generation of urban runoff during project operations, which could contain pollutants if the runoff comes into contact with vehicle fluids on parking surfaces and/or landscape fertilizers and herbicides.
All municipalities within Contra Costa County (and the County itself) are required to develop more restrictive surface water control standards for new development projects as part of the renewal of the Countywide NPDES permit.
The City of Oakley has adopted the County C.3 Stormwater Standards, which require new development and redevelopment projects that create or alter 10,000 sf or more of impervious area to contain and treat all stormwater runoff from the project site. The proposed project would include 226,174 sf of new impervious area; therefore, the proposed project would be subject to the County C.3 Stormwater Standards.40 The proposed project would also be subject to the requirements of the SWRCB and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), as well as the County C.3 Standards, which are included in the City’s NPDES General Permit. In addition, the proposed project would adhere to Title 6, Chapter 11, of the Municipal Code, which establishes standards for stormwater management and discharge.41 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant would submit a Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) that meets the criteria in the most recent version of the Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. Compliance with such requirements would ensure that impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would not occur during operation of the proposed project.
A Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan has been prepared for the proposed project (see Figure 8 and Appendix I). In order to manage and treat stormwater, the project site would be divided into 13 DMAs. Stormwater from the impervious areas within DMA 1A, 1B, 2A, 40 Bellecci & Associates, Inc. Stormwater Control Plan for The Village at 2092 Oakley Road. March 2023. 41 City of Oakley. Oakley Municipal Code [Title 6, Chapter 11]. Updated February 23, 2021. 578
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
70 November 2023
2B, 3A, and 3B would be collected by catch basins and curb cuts and directed through storm drain lines towards one of the three dry wells/bioretention facilities (IMPs 1, 2, and 3) on-site. Following treatment, stormwater from IMPs 1, 2, and 3 would be directed into a new network of 18-inch stormwater lines along the northern boundary of the site and ultimately into the City’s storm drain system in Main Street. DMA 4 would be self-treating.
Stormwater from the impervious off-site sidewalks, located within DMA 10A, 10B, 11A, 11B, 12A, and 12B, would be captured and treated within three proposed IMPs (IMP 10, IMP 11, and IMP 12), which would serve as landscape planters along the project site frontage. The IMPs would range in size from 1,023 sf to 2,045 sf. Each IMP would have a perforated four-inch-wide pipe, which would function as underdrain and would transport any treated runoff to the City’s storm system.
The bioretention areas would accommodate runoff from all 83 residential lots and the roadways on the site. According to the Hydrology Report prepared by Bellecci & Associates for the proposed project (see Appendix H), based on the existing drainage patterns at the project site, the flow rate leaving the site following development of the proposed project would not exceed existing conditions. Furthermore, the Hydrology Report determined that the bioretention basin areas and stormwater lines are designed according to the criteria in the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook to treat stormwater on the project site prior to discharge into the City’s stormwater system and are not anticipated to have a negative impact on the properties adjacent to the project site.
42 Based on the above, the proposed project would not
adversely affect surface water quality.
Conclusion
Based on the above, given compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and existing County regulations, impacts related to water quality would not occur during project construction or operations. Thus, the proposed project would not violate water quality standards/waste discharge requirement, alter the drainage pattern of the site resulting in erosion or siltation, increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or otherwise degrade water quality during construction, and a less-than-significant impact would occur. b,e. Potable water service for the proposed project would be provided by the DWD. According to the DWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the primary water supply for distribution is treated surface water.43 As a result, any increase in water demand associated with the proposed project would be primarily met through surface water supply, rather than groundwater.
The DWD operates a groundwater supply system that currently consists of groundwater extracted from two wells in Oakley, which is then conveyed in a dedicated well supply pipeline to a blending facility. According to the DWD 2020 UWMP, the wells are connected to the East Contra Costa Subbasin underlying the City. The East Contra Costa Subbasin has been designated as a medium-priority basin by the Department of Water Resources, and is not in overdraft conditions.44
42 Bellecci & Associates, Inc. Hydrology Report for The Village at 2092 Oakley Road. December 2, 2022. 43 Diablo Water District. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2022. 44 Ibid. 579
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
71 November 2023
The project site represents a relatively small area compared to the overall surface area of the East Contra Costa Subbasin. In addition, runoff from the proposed impervious surfaces would be directed to bioretention facilities where runoff water would percolate and recharge the East Contra Costa Subbasin. Therefore, any new impervious surfaces associated with the proposed project would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge within the East Contra Costa Subbasin.
Based on the above, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact with respect to substantially decreasing groundwater supplies, interfering substantially with groundwater recharge, or conflicting with or obstructing implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. civ. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map for the project site, the project site is located within the 500-year floodplain (Zone X), which is not designated as a Special Flood Hazard Area. 45 Additionally, pursuant to
Municipal Code Section 6.12.138(e), the project would be required to provide adequate drainage to reduce flood hazards. Thus, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows, resulting in a less-than-significant impact.
d. Tsunamis are defined as sea waves created by undersea fault movement, whereas a seiche is a long-wavelength, large-scale wave action set up in a closed body of water such as a lake or reservoir. The project site is located 46.1 miles from the California coastline and approximately 1.15 miles south of the San Francisco Bay tributaries. Given the distance to the San Francisco Bay tributaries, it is not anticipated that the project site would be affected by flooding risks associated with tsunamis. Furthermore, seiches do not pose a risk to the proposed project because the project site is not located adjacent to a large, closed body of water. As such, the proposed project would not result in a risk related to the release of pollutants due to project inundation flooding, tsunami, or seiche, and no impact would occur.
45 Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map 06013C0355G. Effective March 21, 2017. 580
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
72 November 2023
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Discussion
a. A project risks dividing an established community if the project would introduce infrastructure or alter a land use so as to change the land use conditions in the surrounding community or isolate an existing land use. Currently, the 9.99-acre project site is planted as a vineyard with rows of grapevines. The site is also developed with two single-family residences, one ancillary shed, and a cell tower.
Surrounding existing uses include a mobile home park to the north; a convenience store, gas station, and an oil change service shop to the east; a shopping center to the southeast, across Empire Avenue; single-family residences and agricultural land to the south, across Oakley Road; and a mobile home park and single-family residences to the west. The City of Oakley General Plan designates the project site as CO and the site is zoned C District.
Thus, development of the site was generally evaluated for development as part of the City’s General Plan EIR and Update IS/ND.
The proposed project would be a continuation of the surrounding development and would not isolate an existing land use. As such, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and a less-than-significant impact would occur. b. According to the City’s General Plan, the project site is designated CO and zoned C District. The proposed project includes a request for a General Plan Amendment from CO to RM and a Rezone from C District to P-1 District. Upon approval of both entitlements, the proposed project would develop 83 single-family residences at the project site. The current designations would be amended to reflect the characteristics of the proposed project. While buildout of the site was not anticipated for residential uses, general development of the site has been anticipated, and development of residential uses would not result in greater impacts as compared to development of the site with commercial uses. As such, the proposed project is generally within the realm of what has been anticipated for the site and potential impacts resulting from development of the project have been analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
As demonstrated throughout this IS/MND, the proposed project would not conflict with City policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. For example, in compliance with the ECCCHCP/NCCCP, the proposed project would be subject to pay all applicable fees according to the Fee Zone Map of the ECCCHCP/NCCP prior to construction and completion of pre-construction surveys for Swainson’s hawk, western burrowing owl, and migratory birds. The developer would be required to pay the appropriate fees based on the applicable fee calculator at the time of development. Thus, the proposed project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and thus, a less-thansignificant impact would occur. 581
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
73 November 2023
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Discussion
a,b. The City of Oakley General Plan EIR states that the only viable mineral resource currently mined in the City of Oakley is sand.46 In addition, the General Plan does not identify any known mineral resource areas within the Planning Area, including the project site.
Furthermore, because the site is located near residential development, the site would not be suitable for mining operations. Thus, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or a locally important mineral recovery site, and the proposed project would result in no impact related to mineral resources. 46 City of Oakley. City of Oakley 2020 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report [pg. 278]. September 2002. 582
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
74 November 2023
XIII. NOISE.
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
Discussion
a. The following discussion presents information regarding noise standards and criteria applicable to various land uses, as well as sensitive noise receptors in proximity to the project site and the potential for the proposed project to result in impacts during project construction and operation. The following terms are referenced in the sections below:
• Decibel (dB): A unit of sound energy intensity. An A-weighted decibel (dBA) is a decibel corrected for the variation in frequency response to the typical human ear at commonly encountered noise levels. All references to decibels in this report will be A-weighted unless noted otherwise.
• Day-Night Average Level (Ldn): The average sound level over a 24-hour day, with a +10 decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) hours.
City Noise Standards and Criteria
Chapter 9, Noise Element, of the City’s 2002 General Plan contains the following policies which would be applicable to the proposed project:
9.1.1 New development shall use the land use compatibility table shown in Figure 9-1 and the standards contained within Tables 9-7 and 9-8 (of the General Plan) for determining noise compatibility.
9.1.2 New development of noise-sensitive uses shall not be allowed where the noise level due to non-transportation noise sources will exceed the noise level standards of Table 9-1 (of the General Plan) as measured immediately within the property line or within a designated outdoor activity area (location is at the discretion of the Community Development Director) of the new development, unless effective noise mitigation measures have been incorporated into the development design to achieve the standards specified in Table 9-1 (of the General Plan).
9.1.3 Noise created by new proposed non-transportation noise sources shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the noise level standards of Table 9-7 (of the General 583
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
75 November 2023
Plan) as measured immediately within the property line of lands designated for noise-sensitive uses.
9.1.5 Noise created by new transportation noise sources shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the levels specified in Table 9-9 (of the General Plan) at outdoor activity areas or interior spaces of existing noise-sensitive land uses.
9.1.8 Obtrusive, discretionary noise generated from residences, motor vehicles, commercial establishments, and/or industrial facilities should be minimized or prohibited.
The City of Oakley General Plan Noise Element establishes a noise level standard of 60 dB as normally acceptable at residential land uses. Based upon General Plan Figure 9-1, an ambient noise level of 60 dBA Ldn is considered normally acceptable for single-family residential uses. In addition to the policies listed above, Policy 9.1.6 in the City’s General Plan is summarized in Table 4.
Table 4
Significance of Changes in Noise Exposure
Ambient Noise Level Without
Project, Ldn
Increase Required for Significant
Impact
<60 dB +5.0 dB or more
60-65 dB +3.0 dB or more
>65 dB +1.5 dB or more
Source: City of Oakley General Plan Noise Element, 2002.
Per the City’s General Plan Table 9-7, with regard to non-transportation noise, exterior noise levels at residences should not exceed 55 dBA during daytime hours (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) and 45 dBA during nighttime hours (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM).
The following analysis relies on the aforementioned thresholds of significance to determine if noise impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed project would occur.
Sensitive Noise Receptors and Existing Noise Environment Some land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others, and, thus, are referred to as sensitive noise receptors. Land uses often associated with sensitive noise receptors generally include residences, schools, libraries, hospitals and passive recreational areas. Noise sensitive land uses are typically given special attention in order to achieve protection from excessive noise. The nearest sensitive uses include the mobile homes located to the north and west of the project site boundary, with the closest located approximately 20 feet from the northern and western site boundaries. The existing noise environment in the project vicinity is primarily defined by vehicle traffic on the local roadway network.
Construction Noise
During construction of the proposed project, heavy-duty equipment would be used for demolition, grading, excavation, paving, and building construction, which would result in temporary noise level increases. Standard construction equipment, such as backhoes, 584
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
76 November 2023
dozers, and dump trucks would be used on-site. Project haul truck traffic on local roadways would also result in a temporary noise level increase during construction activities.
Noise levels would vary depending on the type of equipment used, how the equipment is operated, and how well the equipment is maintained. In addition, noise exposure at any single point outside the project site would vary depending on the proximity of construction activities to that point. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime hours. Section 4.2.208 of the Municipal Code restricts noise-producing construction activities to weekday hours between 7:30 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekends and holidays.
Table 5 shows the predicted construction noise levels for development of the proposed project.
Table 5
Construction Equipment Noise
Type of Equipment Maximum Level, dB at 50 feet
Auger Drill Rig 84
Backhoe 78
Compactor 83
Compressor (air) 78
Concrete Saw 90
Dozer 82
Dump Truck 76
Excavator 81
Generator 81
Jackhammer 89
Pneumatic Tools 85
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, January 2006.
Based on the table, activities involved in typical construction would generate maximum noise levels up to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet. However, the nearest receptors to the project site are located within 20 feet west of the construction area and the nearest receptors to the off-site improvement areas are located within 30 feet west of the construction area. Because the nearest single-family residences are located less than 50 feet away from the project site, sensitive receptors would be exposed to noise levels exceeding 90 dB during construction. It should be noted that construction equipment generating maximum levels up to 90 dB would not be used in all phases of construction and would be located 20 feet or more from the nearby residences during construction activities.
Although construction activities are temporary in nature and would likely occur during normal daytime working hours, construction-related noise could result in sleep interference at existing noise-sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the construction if construction activities were to occur outside the normal daytime hours. Furthermore, while the proposed project would be required to comply with all General Plan policies related to noise, a potentially significant impact could occur related to the generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance during construction.
Therefore, impacts resulting from noise levels temporarily exceeding the threshold of significance due to construction would be considered potentially significant. 585
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
77 November 2023
Operational Noise
Noise generated during operations of the proposed project would be limited to residential noise and traffic noise, as discussed in further detail below.
Residential Noise
Operation of the proposed project would include typical residential noise, such as landscaping maintenance, and heating, ventilation, and HVAC systems, which would be compatible with the adjacent existing residential uses. Assuming the project HVAC systems and maintenance equipment would be in normal working order, the proposed project is not anticipated to contribute a measurable operational noise level increase to the existing ambient noise environment at any sensitive receptor locations. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur with regard to on-site operational noise.
Furthermore, it should be noted that the project site is currently designated CO per the City’s General Plan and is zoned C. Residential developments typically generate noise levels that are less than typical of commercial uses. Because the project site would be developed with residential uses, as opposed to commercial uses, potential noise levels increases associated with implementation of the proposed project would be reduced relative to what was anticipated by the City and analyzed for the site in the General Plan EIR and Update IS/ND.
Traffic Noise
The primary noise source associated with the operation of the proposed project would be traffic noise on local roadways. As part of the Traffic Study conducted for the proposed project, TJKM evaluated the existing peak hour traffic volumes at the two nearest major intersections in the vicinity of the project site: the Main Street/Empire Avenue intersection and the Oakley Road/Empire Avenue intersection. The Main Street/Empire Avenue intersection, experiences approximately 2,049 AM peak hour trips and 2,277 PM peak hour trips per day.47 The Main Street/Empire Avenue intersection experiences approximately 975 AM peak hour trips and 1,236 PM peak hour trips per day.
Based on Table 9-2 of the General Plan, the project site is located in an area with existing noise levels of 66.5 dBA Ldn or less. Based upon the Table 4 criteria, where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dB Ldn, at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a +1.5 dB Ldn increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant. A doubling in traffic volumes is required to increase traffic noise levels by 3.0 dB, which is considered to be the threshold for a significant increase per the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON). As discussed in Section XVII, Transportation, of this IS/MND, the proposed project would generate approximately 57 AM peak hour trips and 77 PM peak hour trips per day. Based on the existing peak hour trips for the nearby intersections and the comparatively minor contribution of project-generated traffic, the increase in traffic associated with project-generated trips would not result in a doubling of peak hour vehicle trips and is not anticipated to increase ambient noise levels to over 66.5 dBA Ldn.
The C zoning district allows for commercial development with a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.0. Therefore, based on the existing zoning designation for the 9.99-acre (435,164.4-sf) project site, it is anticipated that the project site could have included a 47 TJKM. Traffic Study for 2092 Oakley Road in Oakley, CA. November 1, 2022. 586
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
78 November 2023
maximum of 435,164.4 sf of commercial development. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition)48 and based on the maximum commercial building square footage for the project site, it is anticipated that development of the site with commercial uses would generate approximately 18,575 daily trips, including 418 AM peak hour trips and 1,614 PM peak hour trips. Based on the General Plan assumptions for the project site, the proposed project would generate significantly less trips per day than what was analyzed in the General Plan EIR and Update IS/ND. Thus, the increase in vehicle trips associated with the proposed project have been generally considered by the City and accounted for in roadway planning efforts. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in noise levels related to vehicle traffic.
Furthermore, Impact 3.13A of the General Plan EIR determined that new development may increase traffic volumes along existing roadways and introduce traffic along new roadways, thereby exposing residents to excessive roadside noise levels and creating a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of General Plan policies would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. As previously discussed, the proposed project would be required to comply with General Plan Policies 9.1.1, 9.1.2, 9.1.3, 9.1.5,
9.1.6, and 9.1.8 with regard to noise generation. Compliance with the aforementioned polices would reduce the proposed project’s traffic noise to a less-than-significant impact.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in noise levels related to vehicle traffic.
Conclusion
Based on the above, operation of the proposed project would not result in the generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the City’s General Plan and the Municipal Code.
However, considering the potential for construction activities to result in temporary increases in noise levels in the project area in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, a potentially significant impact could occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
XIII-1. Prior to approval of grading permits, the following criteria shall be established and noted on graded plans, subject to review and approval by the City of Oakley Planning Division:
• Construction activities shall be limited to between the daytime hours of 7:30 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM on Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays.
• Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and equipped with noise-reduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations. 48 Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. November 2012. 587
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
79 November 2023
Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.
• When not in use, motorized construction equipment shall not be left idling for more than five minutes.
• Stationary equipment (power generators, compressors, etc.) shall be located at the furthest practical distance from nearby noisesensitive land uses or sufficiently shielded to reduce noise-related impacts.
b. Similar to noise, vibration involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. However, noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, whereas vibration usually consists of the excitation of a structure or surface. As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s perception to the vibration depends on their individual sensitivity to vibration, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source and the response of the system which is vibrating.
Vibration is measured in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration in terms of peak particle velocities (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec). Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration levels defined in terms of PPV. Human and structural response to different vibration levels is influenced by a number of factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events. Table 6, which was developed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), shows the vibration levels that would normally be required to result in damage to structures. As shown in the table, the threshold for architectural damage to structures is 0.20 in/sec PPV and continuous vibrations of 0.10 in/sec PPV, or greater, would likely cause annoyance to sensitive receptors.
The primary vibration-generating activities associated with the proposed project would occur during construction when activities such as grading, utilities placement, and paving occur. Table 7 shows the typical vibration levels produced by construction equipment at various distances. As shown in Table 7, the most substantial source of groundborne vibrations associated with project construction would be the use of vibratory compactors.
Use of vibratory compactors/rollers could be required during construction of the proposed project.
Based on Table 7, construction vibration levels anticipated for the project would be less than the 0.2 in/sec threshold at distances of 26 feet or more. Sensitive receptors that could be impacted by construction-related vibrations, including those affected by the off-site improvements, are located approximately 20 feet, or further, from where construction would occur. Thus, construction vibrations could exceed acceptable levels.
However, the proposed project would likely not include the use of vibratory compactors/rollers near the site boundaries as such areas would be designated as the backyards for the residences. Nonetheless, should vibratory compactors be used within 26 feet of the existing structures, the proposed project could exceed acceptable vibration levels.
588
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
80 November 2023
Table 6
Effects of Vibration on People and Buildings
PPV
mm/sec in/sec Human Reaction Effect on Buildings
0.15 to
0.30 0.006 to
0.019
Threshold of perception;
possibility of intrusion
Vibrations unlikely to cause
damage of any type
2.0 0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible
Recommended upper level of the
vibration to which ruins and ancient
monuments should be subjected
2.5 0.10
Level at which continuous
vibrations begin to annoy
people
Virtually no risk of “architectural”
damage to normal buildings
5.0 0.20
Vibrations annoying to people in
buildings (this agrees with the
levels established for people
standing on bridges and
subjected to relative short
periods of vibrations)
Threshold at which there is a risk of
“architectural” damage to normal
dwelling - houses with plastered
walls and ceilings. Special types of
finish such as lining of walls,
flexible ceiling treatment, etc.,
would minimize “architectural”
damage
10 to 15 0.4 to
0.6 Vibrations considered
unpleasant by people subjected
to continuous vibrations and
unacceptable to some people
walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than
normally expected from traffic, but
would cause “architectural”
damage and possibly minor
structural damage
Source: Caltrans. Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations. TAV-02-01-R9601. February 20, 2002.
Table 7
Vibration Levels for Various Construction Equipment
Type of Equipment PPV at 25 feet (in/sec) PPV at 50 feet (in/sec) Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.031
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.027
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001
Auger/drill Rigs 0.089 0.031
Jackhammer 0.035 0.012
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 0.025
Vibratory Compactor/roller 0.210
(less than 0.20 at 26 feet) 0.074
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006.
Because construction activities could expose people to or generate excessive groundbourne vibrations or groundborne noise levels, a potentially significant impact could occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
XIII-2. Throughout the duration of construction, any compaction required within 26 feet from the adjacent residential structures to the north and west shall be accomplished by using static drum rollers, which use weight instead of 589
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
81 November 2023
vibrations to achieve soil compaction. As an alternative to this requirement, preconstruction crack documentation and construction vibration monitoring could be conducted to ensure that construction vibrations do not cause damage to any adjacent structures. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be submitted to the City of Oakley Public Works and Engineering Department for review and approval.
c. The nearest airport to the site is Byron Airport, located approximately 12.64 miles southeast of the site. The site is not covered by an existing airport land use plan. Given that the project site is not located within two miles of a public or private airport, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels associated with airports. Thus, no impact would occur. 590
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
82 November 2023
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth
in an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (e.g., through projects in an
undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a. The proposed project would include the development of 83 single-family residential units.
Using the City of Oakley General Plan’s average person per household value for singlefamily uses of 3.41, the proposed project would generate approximately 283 additional residents (83 x 3.41 = 283.03).49 The 2020 U.S. Census estimated the population of Oakley to be approximately 43,357.50 An increase in population of 283 residents would constitute an approximately 0.65 percent increase in the City’s population, which is not considered substantial growth. Furthermore, as discussed in Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems, of this IS/MND, adequate utility infrastructure would be available to support the proposed project.
Based on the above, the project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to inducing substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. b. The proposed project would require demolition of the two existing single-family residences and the ancillary shed. However, the removal of the structures would not be considered to result in the displacement of a substantial number of existing people or housing. In addition, although two residences would be removed from the City’s housing stock, the proposed project would involve the construction of 83 new residences in the future. As such, the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and a lessthan-significant impact would occur. 49 City of Oakley. City of Oakley General Plan, Focused General Plan Update [pg. 2-7]. Adopted January 11, 2022. 50 U.S. Census Bureau. Quick Facts, City of Oakley, California. Available at:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/oakleycitycalifornia/POP010220#POP010220. Accessed June 2023. 591
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
83 November 2023
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES.
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks?
e. Other Public Facilities?
Discussion
a. Fire protection services within the project area are provided by the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD). The CCCFPD provides fire suppression and prevention, emergency medical, rescue, ambulance transport, and public education services to more than one million people across the 304-square-mile service area.51 Services are provided from 25 fire stations and the nearest station, Station 93, is located at 530 O’Hara Avenue, approximately 1.14 miles southeast of the project site. The proposed project would be conditioned to establish a funding mechanism to cover the ongoing financial impact the project would have on fire protection services provided in the City.
Participation in the CFD would mitigate any increased demands on fire services that may result from the proposed project, as well as ensure that the project conforms with the City of Oakley’s General Plan Policy 4.4.2, which requires new developments to pay a fair share of costs for new fire protection facilities and services. Additionally, the proposed project would not include any alterations to the circulation system of the surrounding area which could conflict with the City of Oakley’s General Plan Policy 4.4.4, or otherwise impact response times.
Although buildout of the site was not anticipated for residential uses, general development of the site with commercial uses has been anticipated. As such, the proposed project is generally within the realm of what has been anticipated for the site and the increased demand for fire services due to development at the project site was anticipated and included in the CCCFPD’s planning efforts. In addition, the project would be required to pay development fees in accordance with the City of Oakley Municipal Code. As the proposed project is not expected to cause significant degradation to response times or service ratios for the CCCFPD, which would induce the need for physically altered or expanded governmental facilities for fire protection services, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact.
b. Police protection is provided to the City of Oakley by the Oakley Police Department. The Oakley Police Department currently employs 43 persons, including the Chief of Police, two Lieutenants, six Sergeants, four Detectives, 21 Police Officers, two part time Police Records Assistants, one Records Supervisor and three full time and two part time Police 51 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. 2021 Annual Report. Available at: https://www.cccfpd.org/2021- annual-report/. Accessed May 2023.
592
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
84 November 2023
Services Assistants and one Property & Evidence Technician.52 As previously discussed, the proposed project would result in the development of 83 single-family residences. As new residences typically generate a demand for police services, an increase in demand for police services would likely occur with implementation of the project. While buildout of the site was not anticipated for residential uses, general development of the site has been anticipated, and development of residential uses would not result in greater impacts as compared to development of the site with commercial uses. As such, the increase in police service demand from development of the project site has been included in City of Oakley’s demand predictions based on anticipated General Plan buildout. In addition, the project would be conditioned to establish a funding mechanism to cover the ongoing financial impact the project would have on police services provided in the City to mitigate the financial impact to the City’s police services budget.
Based on the above, the proposed project would create a demand that was anticipated for the site and would not induce the need for physically altered or expanded governmental facilities for police protection services, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-thansignificant impact. c. The Oakley Union Elementary School District, Antioch Unified School District, and the Liberty Union High School District provide public educational services to the project site.
Given that the proposed project would include development of the project site with 83 single-family residences, the proposed project could increase the demand for schools in the area. Using a standard student generation rate of 0.53 students per dwelling unit, 53 the proposed project’s addition of 83 single-family residences would result in approximately 44 new K-12 students. The City of Oakley General Plan includes goals and policies set forth to ensure adequate primary and secondary schools are developed in response to population growth. The City expects the General Plan to assist in the goal of providing an efficient and complete educational system for the citizens of Oakley. For example, Policy 4.6.6, set forth in the General Plan, ensures that school facility impacts fees are collected and requires that the City shall work with developers and school districts to establish mitigation measures to ensure the availability of adequate school facilities.
The proposed project would be subject to payment of School Impact Mitigation Development Fees to fund local school services. Proposition 1A/SB 50 prohibits local agencies from using the inadequacy of school facilities as a basis for denying or conditioning approvals of any “[…] legislative or adjudicative act…involving…the planning, use, or development of real property” (Government Code 65996[b]). Satisfaction of the Proposition 1A/SB 50 statutory requirements by a developer are deemed to be “full and complete mitigation.” In other words, payment of applicable development fees would be sufficient in reducing the impacts associated with an increase in students from the project.
Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact regarding an increase in demand for schools.
d,e. The City of Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.2.208 requires at least five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. As noted previously, buildout of the proposed project would result in 52 Kenneth W. Strelo, Planning Manager, City of Oakley. Personal communication [email] with Rod Stinson, Vice President, Raney Planning and Management. September 6, 2022. 53 Antioch Unified School District. Facilities Master Plan [pg. 248]. July 2018. 593
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
85 November 2023
an increase of approximately 341 new residents to the City. As a result, approximately
1.71 acres of parkland would be required to achieve the desired parkland ratio (0.005 acres of parkland per resident x 341 new residents = 1.705 acres of parkland). Oakley Resolution 19-03 requires subdividers of land within the City to dedicate land and/or pay fees in lieu of the dedication for the neighborhood and community parks and recreation programs which is discussed in further detail in Section XVI, Recreation, below.
The Oakley 2020 General Plan EIR also analyzed impacts of buildout of the General Plan on other public facilities, such as libraries. The Oakley Branch Library is located in Freedom High School at 1050 Neroly Road and is open Tuesday through Saturday. Other libraries in close proximity to the City of Oakley include the Antioch Library and the Brentwood Branch Library. Future residents of the proposed project would have access to the aforementioned facilities.
Given that the proposed project would be required to pay the applicable park in-lieu fee, and that development of the site was generally anticipated by the City, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to parks and other public facilities. 594
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
86 November 2023
XVI. RECREATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion
a,b. As discussed in Section XIV, Population and Housing, of this IS/MND, the proposed project would involve the development of 83 single-family residences, which are anticipated to serve approximately 341 residents. Thus, an increase in demand on recreational facilities is anticipated. The City of Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.2.208 requires five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Thus, as noted previously, 1.71 acres of parkland would be required to accommodate the anticipated population increase associated with the proposed project.
Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.2.204 mandates developments that include subdivision of land to either dedicate parkland or pay fees in lieu of the dedication for the neighborhood and community parks and recreation programs. As previously noted, the project would include an 8,730-sf (0.2-acre) community park in the northeast corner of the site and a 5,840-sf (0.13-acre) open space area in the southern portion of the site. In addition, the six dry wells (IMPs 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, and 12) would provide a total of 14,305 sf (0.33 acres) of landscaped bioretention area. Given that the proposed project would only dedicate a total of 0.66 acres of parkland, the proposed project would not meet the parkland requirements set forth in Municipal Code Section 9.2.208. Therefore, the project applicant would be subject to in-lieu fees required pursuant to the Municipal Code. The park impact fees imposed by the City are used to generate revenue to provide park and recreational services on a community-wide level and to the general project vicinity.
Therefore, the proposed project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of facilities would occur or be accelerated. Furthermore, the project would not require further construction or expansion which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment, and a less-than-significant impact related to recreation would occur. 595
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
87 November 2023
XVII. TRANSPORTATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
Discussion
a. The law has changed with respect to how transportation-related impacts may be addressed under CEQA. Traditionally, lead agencies used level of service (LOS) to assess the significance of such impacts, with greater levels of congestion considered to be more significant than lesser levels. Mitigation measures typically took the form of capacityincreasing improvements, which often had their own environmental impacts (e.g., to biological resources). Depending on circumstances, and an agency’s tolerance for congestion (e.g., as reflected in its general plan), LOS D, E, or F often represented significant environmental effects. In 2013, however, the State Legislature passed legislation with the intention of ultimately doing away with LOS in most instances as a basis for environmental analysis under CEQA. Enacted as part of SB 743 (2013), PRC Section 21099, subdivision (b)(1), directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency for certification and adoption proposed CEQA Guidelines addressing “criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas. Those criteria shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. In developing the criteria, [OPR] shall recommend potential metrics to measure transportation impacts that may include, but are not limited to, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated. The office may also establish criteria for models used to analyze transportation impacts to ensure the models are accurate, reliable, and consistent with the intent of this section.”
Subdivision (b)(2) of Section 21099 further provides that “[u]pon certification of the guidelines by the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency pursuant to this section, automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to [CEQA], except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” (Italics added.)
Pursuant to SB 743, the Natural Resources Agency promulgated CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 in late 2018. It became effective in early 2019. Subdivision (a) of that section provides that “[g]enerally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For the purposes of this section, ‘vehicle miles traveled’ refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel. 596
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
88 November 2023
Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) below (regarding roadway capacity), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.”54 Please refer to question ‘b’ for a discussion of VMT.
Project Trip Generation
The Traffic Study for the proposed project was prepared by TJKM to identify the proposed project’s potential trip generation and any transportation related impacts associated with such (see Appendix J).
55 Project vehicle trip generation rates were obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). Based on the ITE rates, the proposed project is estimated to generate 774 daily vehicle trips, including 57 AM peak hour and 77 PM peak hour trips.
Consistency with the City of Oakley General Plan Policies – Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Facilities
The proposed project’s potential impacts related to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities are discussed below.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities are comprised of crosswalks, sidewalks, pedestrian signals, and offstreet paths, which provide safe and convenient routes for pedestrians to access destinations such as institutions, businesses, public transportation, and recreation facilities. Continuous sidewalks with curb cuts are present along both sides of Main Street and Empire Avenue, and along the south side of Oakley Road. Existing sidewalks would facilitate pedestrian traffic to and from the project site and the surrounding commercial and residential land uses. The nearby intersections of Main Street/Empire Avenue and Oakley Road/Empire Avenue provide curb cuts and signalized crosswalks with pedestrian push buttons.
The proposed project would include construction of sidewalks along the project frontage on the north side of Oakley Road and for a short segment on the west side of Main Street.
All new sidewalks would be required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and would connect to the existing pedestrian network in the project vicinity. The project would add internal sidewalks and pedestrian pathways throughout the project site, which would connect pedestrians to the residences, parking and park areas, and the existing sidewalk on Main Street. The project would include the installation of crosswalks across the A Street, at the proposed A Street and Oakley Road intersection, and at two crossings across the future internal roadways, B Street and F Street. The project would also provide pedestrian access to the northwest corner of the site from the existing sidewalk along the west side of Main Street.
Considering the above, the proposed construction of new sidewalks would enhance the existing pedestrian infrastructure and would be required to comply with applicable City and ADA standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the creation of a 54 Subdivision (b)(2) of Section 15064.3 (“transportation projects”) provides that “[t]ransportation projects that reduce, or have no impact on, vehicle miles traveled should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. For roadway capacity projects, agencies have discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements. To the extent that such impacts have already been adequately addressed at a programmatic level, such as in a regional transportation plan EIR, a lead agency may tier from that analysis as provided in Section 15152. 55 TJKM. Traffic Study for 2092 Oakley Road in Oakley, CA. November 1, 2022. 597
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
89 November 2023
conflict with any adopted programs, plans, ordinances, or policies addressing pedestrian facilities and a less-than-significant impact would occur related to pedestrian facilities.
Bicycle Facilities
Approximately 29 miles of bicycle facilities are installed throughout the City of Oakley, including 15 miles of Class II on-street bicycle lanes and 12.4 miles of Class I multi-use paths.56 In addition, 23 miles of additional bicycle facilities are either planned or proposed, such as new Class II bicycle lanes on Main Street and Laurel Road in the vicinity of the project site.
57 In the vicinity of the project site, Class II bicycle facilities exist along Main Street and the along the project frontage on Oakley Road, between Empire Avenue and Kelsey Lane. In addition, a Class III bicycle route exists along Empire Avenue, between Oakley Road and Laurel Road.
Although the proposed project would not include any new bicycle facilities, bicycle access to the project site would be provided by nearby bicycle facilities along Main Street and Oakley Road. The City of Oakley Focused General Plan Update identifies planned Class II bicycle lanes along Oakley Road and Empire Avenue, as well as a Class IV separated bike lane along Main Street. Implementation of the proposed project would not preclude the future development of the planned bicycle lanes. As such, development of the project would not preclude construction of any planned bicycle trails, the proposed project would not result in the creation of a conflict with any adopted programs, plans, ordinances, or policies addressing bicycle facilities, and a less-than-significant impact would occur related to bicycle facilities.
An adverse effect to bicyclists occurs if the proposed project disrupts existing bicycle facilities; or conflicts and/or creates inconsistencies with adopted bicycle system plans, guidelines, and policies. The City of Oakley General Plan Update 2021 illustrates existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the City. The project does not propose bicycle facilities along surrounding roadways, thus adverse impacts to existing and future planned bicycle facilities are not expected.
Transit Facilities
Tri-Delta Transit provides transit services in the City of Oakley, with three lines connecting Brentwood and the Pittsburg/Bay Point Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station. The following Tri-Delta Transit Routes currently operate in the project vicinity:
• Route 300X, the Brentwood Park & Ride/Antioch BART route, is a weekday express route connecting Brentwood to the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART station via Oakley and Antioch. This bus travels along Main Street, operating from 3:59 AM to approximately 9:57 PM with 15- to 45-minute headways. • Route 383, the Adams Lane-O’Hara Avenue/Wilbur Avenue-Cavallo Road, connects Oakley to Antioch and Freedom High School in Oakley. This route, in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions, provides only weekday service.
Route 383 operates from 5:04 AM to 6:45 PM with 45- to 90-minute headways. • Route 391, the Pittsburg Center BART/Brentwood Park & Ride route, provides weekday service to most East County cities. Route 391 operates from 4:06 AM to 1:28 AM with 30- to 74-minute headways.
56 City of Oakley. Mobility White Paper, City of Oakley Focused General Plan Update. December 2021. 57 Ibid. 598
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
90 November 2023
In the vicinity of the project site, the nearest existing transit facility is located at the intersection of Main Street and Empire Avenue, approximately 0.4 miles north from the project site. As previously noted, the project would construct sidewalks connecting the project site to Main Street and Empire Avenue, which would facilitate pedestrian traffic to the nearby transit stops. Although the proposed project would add riders to the existing transit services, TJKM concluded that the proposed project would add very few trips to the existing transit facilities, which could be accommodated by the existing transit capacity and the transit stops at the Main Street and Empire Avenue intersection. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing transit service and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
Conclusion
Based on the above, a less-than-significant impact would occur related to conflicting with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
b. Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines provides specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts. Pursuant to Section 15064.3, analysis of VMT attributable to a project is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel. Although the City of Oakley has not yet established any standards or thresholds regarding VMT, pursuant to Section 15064.3(b)(3), a lead agency may analyze a project’s VMT qualitatively based on the availability of transit, proximity to destinations, etc. While changes to driving conditions that increase intersection delay are an important consideration for traffic operations and management, the method of analysis does not fully describe environmental effects associated with fuel consumption, emissions, and public health. Section 15064.3(3) changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in CEQA from measuring impact to drivers to measuring the impact of driving.
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) considers residential projects to have a significant impact on VMT if the project generated home-based VMT per resident is higher than the following:
• 85 percent of the home-based VMT per resident in the municipality; or • 85 percent of the existing County-wide average home-based VMT per resident.
TJKM performed a VMT analysis for the project using the CCTA Model. Two full model runs were performed in accordance with the CCTA VMT methodology. The first model run was for Baseline Conditions, which represent the Year 2020 traffic conditions for the City of Oakley, and the second model run was for Baseline Plus Project Conditions.
Under Baseline conditions, the home-based VMT per capita for the City of Oakley is 26.76.
For the project to have a less-than-significant impact, the project must produce VMT within the 85 percent threshold, which equates to 22.75 (0.85 x 26.76) VMT per resident. Under Baseline Plus Project Conditions, the VMT per capita for the project Travel Analysis Zone is 19.09, which falls under the 22.75 threshold. Thus, impacts to VMT would be considered less than significant.
599
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
91 November 2023
In addition, the CCTA Guidelines require Cumulative VMT impacts to be evaluated for consistency with the Contra Costa County General Plan (Envision 2040).58 OPR’s “Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA” recommends that an impact finding from an efficiency-based project-specific VMT analysis (i.e., Baseline Plus Project Conditions) would imply an identical impact finding for a cumulative VMT analysis.59 An example provided by OPR explains that a project that falls below an efficiency-based threshold that is aligned with long-term environmental goals and relevant plans would have no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Therefore, because impacts to VMT under Baseline Plus Project Conditions are less than significant, the proposed project’s cumulative impacts related to VMT would be less than significant.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), and a less-than-significant impact would occur. c,d. Primary access to the project site would be provided by the new roadway, A Street, off of Oakley Road. A Street would provide right-in and right-only access to and from the project site on the north side of Oakley Road. The project would also include off-site improvements to widen the north side of Oakley Road along the project frontage and increase the westbound direction from one to two lanes. An internal private roadway system would be constructed throughout the project site to provide access to each unit.
The internal roadways would be within a 21- to 67-foot ROW and would generally provide 10 to 18 feet of travel lane in each direction. The proposed circulation improvements would be subject to compliance with all applicable roadway design standards. The proposed project would not alter the existing transportation network nor increase hazards due to a geometrical design feature. According to the Traffic Study prepared for the proposed project, the existing and proposed roadways are anticipated to provide adequate site access for vehicles. Implementation of the proposed project would introduce additional vehicle traffic along Main Street and Oakley Road. However, according to the Traffic Study, the proposed on-site circulation is not anticipated to result in any significant operational issues on City streets.
Construction traffic associated with the proposed project would include heavy-duty vehicles which would share the area roadways with normal vehicle traffic, as well as transport of construction materials, and daily construction employee trips to and from the site. However, such heavy-duty truck traffic would only occur throughout the duration of construction activities and would cease upon buildout of the proposed subdivision. During project construction, public roads in the vicinity would remain open and available for use by emergency vehicles and other traffic. In addition to the construction of structures and the new internal roadway network, the project would also include off-site improvements to extend the storm water line within Main Street and install a water line tie-in within Oakley Road. However, during construction of the off-site utility and roadway improvements, vehicle travel along Oakley Road and Main Street may be affected by truck traffic and/or road closures. As a result, the implementation of the utility improvements would directly influence the transportation network near the site during construction, and could result in roadway or lane closures that adversely affect residents in the project area. 58 Contra Costa County. Transportation Analysis Guidelines. June 23, 2020. 59 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA [pg. 6]. December 2018.
600
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
92 November 2023
Emergency vehicle access would be provided by the new driveway off of Oakley Road and a new 21-foot-wide emergency vehicle access-only driveway off of Main Street, which would connect to the internal roadway in the northeastern corner of the site. Removable bollards would be installed as part of the northern most emergency vehicle access driveway and the EVA driveway would not be accessible to the general public. In addition, all interior drive aisles and parking stalls would comply with City design standards, and, thus, on-site circulation would be expected to function acceptably for emergency response vehicles. As such, the proposed on-site vehicle circulation would allow for emergency vehicle access and would not impede current response times to the project site.
Based on the above, operations of the proposed project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, or result in inadequate emergency access. However, without proper planning of construction activities, construction traffic could interfere with existing roadway operations during the construction phase, which could result in a risk to public safety. Therefore, project traffic related to construction activities could result in a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
XVII-1. Implement Mitigation Measure IX-4.
601
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
93 November 2023
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k).
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
Discussion
a,b. As discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources, of this IS/MND, a Cultural Resources Study was prepared for the proposed project by Origer.
60 The study indicated that Native
American or historic-era cultural resources were not present in the project site. In addition, the NAHC conducted a records search of the SLF on May 31, 2023. According to the NAHC SLF, the search results were negative and, thus, the project site does not contain known tribal cultural resources.
As part of the Cultural Resources Study, Origer contacted the following tribes: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People, Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area, Nashville Enterprise Miwok-Maidu-Nishinam Tribe, North Valley Yokuts Tribe, The Ohlone Indian Tribe, Tule River Indian Tribe, Wilton Rancheria, and The Confederated Villages of Lisjan. It should be noted that Origer’s notification did not constitute formal consultation under AB 52 or SB 18. On May 26, 2023, the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People responded with a request to consult with Origer on the project.
In compliance with AB 52 (PRC Section 21080.3.1) and SB 18, a project notification letter was distributed to the chairpersons of the following tribes on June 8, 2023: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, Guidiville Indian Rancheria, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People, Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area, Nashville Enterprise Miwok-MaiduNishinam Tribe, North Valley Yokuts Tribe, The Ohlone Indian Tribe, Wilton Rancheria, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, and The Confederated Villages of Lisjan. 60 Tom Origer & Associates. Cultural Resources Study of the Property at 2092 Oakley Road, Oakley, Contra Costa County, California. June 9, 2023.
602
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
94 November 2023
The Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People responded on June 19, 2023, with a request to consult on the proposed project. The City of Oakley contacted the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People on July 19, 2023, to discuss the next steps for consultation. Further response from the Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ohlone People has not been received to date.
The Confederated Villages of Lisjan responded on June 21, 2023, with a request to consult on the proposed project. A request for information was received from The Confederated Villages of Lisjan Chairperson Corrina Gould on July 5, 2023. Chairperson Gould was supplied with the Cultural Resources Report prepared by Tom Origer & Associates for the proposed project on July 5, 2023. On November 1, 2023, Chairperson Gould responded that the Confederated Villages of Lisjan did not have any comments on the project. As such, consultation was concluded on November 1, 2023.
Based on the history of disturbance at the project site as a result of past development and agricultural uses, as well as the lack of identified tribal cultural resources at the site, tribal cultural resources are not expected to occur within the project site. Nevertheless, the possibility exists that development of the proposed project could result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource if previously unknown tribal cultural resources are uncovered during grading or other ground-disturbing activities.
Thus, a potentially significant impact related to tribal cultural resources could occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
XVIII-1. Implement Mitigation Measures V-1 and V-2.
603
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
95 November 2023
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment,
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Discussion
a-c. Water, sanitary sewer, stormwater drainage, electricity, and telecommunications services would be provided to the project site by way of new connections to existing infrastructure in the immediate project area. Brief discussions of each utility that would serve the proposed project are included below.
Water
The proposed project would include the installation of new eight-inch water lines throughout the project site. The water system would connect to the existing 10-inch water main in Oakley Road.
Water service for the proposed project would be provided by the DWD. Pursuant to the DWD’s 2020 UWMP, DWD’s primary water supply for the distribution system is treated surface water from the United States Bureau of Reclamation’s Central Valley Project (CVP) purchased from the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). CVP water is conveyed through the Contra Costa Canal and Los Vaqueros system and treated at the Randall‐ Bold Water Treatment Plant in Oakley, which is jointly owned by DWD and CCWD.61 According to the DWD 2020 UWMP, the DWD has a baseline demand of 177 gallons per capita per day (GPCD).62 Thus, the project is projected to increase water demand by 50,091 gallons per day (177 GPCD x 283 residents), or 56.11 acre-feet per year. 61 Diablo Water District. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2022. 62 Ibid [pg. 3-5]. 604
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
96 November 2023
According to the DWD 2020 UWMP, the DWD’s projected water supply exceeds the water demand for normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years until at least 2040.63 For example, during the fifth year of drought in 2025, the anticipated supply exceeds the anticipated demand by 1,207 acre-feet per year. Therefore, the DWD would have sufficient water supply to accommodate the 56.11 acre-feet per year increase associated with the proposed project.
Furthermore, the project site has been anticipated for development by the City of Oakley’s General Plan EIR and Update IS/ND. The DWD’s demand estimates consider increases in demand due to buildout of the City’s General Plan;64 consequently, the DWD has anticipated some level of increased water demand due to development of the project site compared to existing conditions. In addition, DWD’s demand estimates would have anticipated commercial development at the project site which would generally have a higher water demand than the proposed residences. Thus, given the DWD’s anticipated water surplus even with consideration of building of the project, adequate long-term water supply exists to accommodate the proposed project.
Wastewater
The proposed project would include construction of new eight-inch sanitary sewer lines throughout the project site, which would then direct wastewater to the existing sanitary sewer main within Main Street.
Sanitary sewer services would be provided to the project site by ISD. The wastewater system is composed of collection, treatment, and effluent recycling facilities. ISD operates and maintains the sewer system, which collects wastewater flows from individual developments within the City and conveys them to ISD’s Water Recycling Facility.
Wastewater is ultimately treated and stored either at the facility in a large 76 million gallon holding pond, or the treated water is conveyed to an outfall pipe in the San Joaquin River.
The Water Recycling Facility has an average daily flow of 2.3 million gallons per day (MGD). The facility has a treatment capacity of approximately 4.3 MGD.65 Using standard industry assumptions that (1) domestic water use represents 40 percent of consumption; and (2) wastewater generation represents 90 percent of domestic water use, the proposed project would generate approximately 18,033 gallons of wastewater per day (50,091 gallons per day x 0.4 x 0.9). The addition of wastewater from the proposed project would represent less than 0.4 percent of the Water Recycling Facility’s total capacity. Therefore, future development of 83 residences would not require the construction of new or expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities, as the Water Recycling Facility has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project.
In addition, because the site has been anticipated for development in the City’s General Plan, and, thus, anticipated by the ISD, the increase in effluent associated with the proposed project would not be entirely new. Therefore, given the available capacity within the wastewater facility and the generation of wastewater, the proposed project would not result in inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the existing commitments.
63 Diablo Water District. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan [pg. 5-5 to 5-6]. May 2022. 64 Ibid [pg. 2-2]. 65 Ironhouse Sanitary District. Sewer System Management Plan [pg. I-3]. April 2017. 605
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
97 November 2023
Stormwater
As discussed above in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND, all stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces would be directed and treated at the six IMPs within the project site. The proposed on-site drainage systems would be required to comply with the City’s SWPPP and erosion and sediment control plan, as well as the County C.3 standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not affect stormwater flows into ISD’s existing system.
Electricity and Telecommunications
Electricity and telecommunications utilities would be provided by way of connections to existing infrastructure located within the immediate project vicinity. PG&E would provide electricity services to the project site, while AT&T would provide telecommunication services. The proposed project would not require major upgrades to, or extension of, existing infrastructure. Thus, impacts related to electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure would be less than significant.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater, electric power, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Furthermore, adequate wastewater capacity would also be available to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to ISD’s existing commitments. Thus, a lessthan-significant impact would occur. d,e. Solid waste, recyclable materials, and compostable material from the City of Oakley is hauled to Potrero Hills Landfill, located in Solano County. The landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of 4,330 tons per day. According to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the Potrero Hills Landfill has a remaining capacity of 13,872,000 cubic yards out of a total permitted capacity of 83,100,000 cubic yards.66 Due to the substantial amount of available capacity remaining at Potrero Hills Landfill, sufficient capacity would be available to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. Additionally, because the site has been anticipated for development by the City General Plan, impacts related to solid waste resulting from development of the site have already been evaluated in the City’s General Plan EIR and Update IS/ND.
Furthermore, as required by CALGreen Code Section 4.408, the proposed project would be required to submit a Waste Management Plan to the City detailing on-site sorting of construction debris. Implementation of the Waste Management Plan would ensure that the proposed project meets established diversion requirements for reused or recycled construction waste.
Based on the above, the proposed project would comply with applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact related to solid waste. 66 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Facility/Site Summary: Potrero Hill Landfill (48-AA-0075). Available at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Summary/3591. Accessed May 2023.
606
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
98 November 2023
XX. WILDFIRE.
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to, pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
Discussion
a-d. According to the CALFIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program, the project site is not located within a Very High or High FHSZ.
67 In addition, the project site is located near
existing development and roadways that may act as a fire break. The presence of urban development and paved areas would preclude the uncontrolled spread of wildlife. As such, the proposed project would not result in substantial risks or hazards related to wildfires, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
67 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Contra Costa County, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. January 7, 2009.
607
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
99 November 2023
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-ThanSignificant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Discussion
a. As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources, of this IS/MND, while a limited potential exists for western burrowing owl, Swainson’s hawk, and other birds protected by the MBTA to occur on-site, the proposed project would comply with the ECCCHCP/NCCP requirements including avoidance and minimization measures. In addition, Mitigation Measures V-1 and V-2 would ensure that, in the event that the on-site structures are considered historic, or if previously unknown prehistoric resources are discovered within the project site, such resources would be protected in compliance with the requirements of CEQA and other State standards.
Considering the above, the proposed project would not degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce or impact the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife populations to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, with implementation of the mitigation measures identified herein, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b. The proposed project, in conjunction with other development within the City of Oakley, could incrementally contribute to cumulative impacts in the area. However, as demonstrated in this IS/MND, all potential environmental impacts that could occur as a result of project implementation would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through compliance with the mitigation measures included in this IS/MND, as well as applicable General Plan policies, Municipal Code standards, and other applicable local and State regulations.
608
The Village at 2092 Oakley Road Subdivision
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
100
November 2023
All cumulative impacts related to air quality, noise, and transportation are either less than significant or less than significant after mitigation. Given the scope of the project, any incremental effects would not be considerable relative to the effects of all past, current, and probable future projects. In addition, although buildout of the site was not anticipated for residential uses, general development of the site has anticipated, and development of residential uses would not result in greater impacts compared to development of the site with commercial uses. As such, the proposed project is within the realm of what has been anticipated for the site and potential impacts resulting from development of the project have been analyzed in the General Plan EIR and the Update IS/ND.
Therefore, when viewed in conjunction with other closely related past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, with the implementation of mitigation, development of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulative impacts, and the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
c. As described in this IS/MND, the proposed project would comply with all applicable General Plan policies, Municipal Code standards, other applicable local and State regulations, and mitigation measures included herein. In addition, as discussed in Section VII, Geology and Soils, Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section XIII, Noise, of this IS/MND, the proposed project would not cause substantial effects to human beings, including effects related to exposure to hazardous materials and noise, after the implementation of the required mitigation measures. Therefore, with implementation of the required mitigation measures, the proposed project would result in a less-thansignificant impact. 609
Appendix A
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions – CalEEMod and Road Construction Emissions Model Results
610
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
1 / 50
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2024) - Unmitigated
3.3. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
611
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
2 / 50
3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
3.15. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
612
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
3 / 50
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
613
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
4 / 50
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
614
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
5 / 50
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
615
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
6 / 50
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
616
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
7 / 50
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Village at 2092 Oakley Road
Construction Start Date 6/1/2024
Operational Year 2025
Lead Agency City of Oakley
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.60
Precipitation (days) 20.6
Location 37.999009795899084, -121.73388586447466
County Contra Costa
City Oakley
Air District Bay Area AQMD
Air Basin San Francisco Bay Area
TAZ 1361
EDFZ 1
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.14
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
617
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
8 / 50
Single Family
Housing
83.0 Dwelling Unit 9.99 161,850 972,167 — 240 —
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 11.4 36.0 33.7 0.09 1.60 11.2 12.2 1.47 4.09 5.56 — 12,236 12,236 0.87 1.50 20.3 12,726 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 11.4 12.6 15.8 0.03 0.53 1.45 1.98 0.49 0.36 0.85 — 3,069 3,069 0.12 0.07 0.05 3,093 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.29 7.71 7.89 0.02 0.30 1.76 2.05 0.27 0.54 0.81 — 2,344 2,344 0.14 0.19 1.23 2,405 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.78 1.41 1.44 < 0.005 0.05 0.32 0.37 0.05 0.10 0.15 — 388 388 0.02 0.03 0.20 398 Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 54.0 54.0 — — 82.0 — — 54.0 — — — — — — — — — Unmit. No No — — No — — No — — — — — — — — —
618
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
9 / 50
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 54.0 54.0 — — 82.0 — — 54.0 — — — — — — — — — Unmit. No No — — No — — No — — — — — — — — —
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 11.4 36.0 33.7 0.09 1.60 11.2 12.2 1.47 4.09 5.56 — 12,236 12,236 0.87 1.50 20.3 12,726 2025 11.3 11.7 15.8 0.03 0.46 1.45 1.91 0.43 0.36 0.78 — 3,087 3,087 0.12 0.07 1.89 3,111 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 11.4 12.6 15.8 0.03 0.53 1.45 1.98 0.49 0.36 0.85 — 3,069 3,069 0.12 0.07 0.05 3,093 2025 11.3 11.8 15.6 0.03 0.46 1.45 1.91 0.43 0.36 0.78 — 3,060 3,060 0.12 0.07 0.05 3,083 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 3.19 7.71 7.89 0.02 0.30 1.76 2.05 0.27 0.54 0.81 — 2,344 2,344 0.14 0.19 1.23 2,405 2025 4.29 4.31 5.73 0.01 0.17 0.52 0.69 0.16 0.13 0.29 — 1,118 1,118 0.04 0.02 0.30 1,127 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.58 1.41 1.44 < 0.005 0.05 0.32 0.37 0.05 0.10 0.15 — 388 388 0.02 0.03 0.20 398 2025 0.78 0.79 1.05 < 0.005 0.03 0.09 0.13 0.03 0.02 0.05 — 185 185 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 187
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 619
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
10 / 50
Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.78 3.61 32.9 0.07 0.13 5.69 5.82 0.12 1.44 1.57 36.8 8,126 8,163 4.11 0.27 26.6 8,374 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.17 4.03 25.9 0.07 0.12 5.69 5.81 0.12 1.44 1.56 36.8 7,664 7,700 4.15 0.30 1.82 7,896 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 7.28 3.80 26.8 0.07 0.12 5.56 5.69 0.12 1.41 1.53 36.8 7,584 7,621 4.13 0.28 11.9 7,821 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.33 0.69 4.89 0.01 0.02 1.02 1.04 0.02 0.26 0.28 6.09 1,256 1,262 0.68 0.05 1.97 1,295 Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 54.0 54.0 — — 82.0 — — 54.0 — — — — — — — — — Unmit. No No — — No — — No — — — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 54.0 54.0 — — 82.0 — — 54.0 — — — — — — — — — Unmit. No No — — No — — No — — — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 10.0 10.0 — — 15.0 — — 10.0 — — — — — — — — — Unmit. No No — — No — — No — — — — — — — — —
620
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
11 / 50
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.22 2.60 27.8 0.06 0.04 5.69 5.74 0.04 1.44 1.49 — 6,547 6,547 0.26 0.25 25.5 6,654 Area 4.51 0.05 4.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.6 Energy 0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,516 1,516 0.16 0.01 — 1,523 Water — — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Total 7.78 3.61 32.9 0.07 0.13 5.69 5.82 0.12 1.44 1.57 36.8 8,126 8,163 4.11 0.27 26.6 8,374 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.02 3.06 25.5 0.06 0.04 5.69 5.74 0.04 1.44 1.49 — 6,097 6,097 0.30 0.28 0.66 6,188 Area 4.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,516 1,516 0.16 0.01 — 1,523 Water — — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Total 7.17 4.03 25.9 0.07 0.12 5.69 5.81 0.12 1.44 1.56 36.8 7,664 7,700 4.15 0.30 1.82 7,896 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.92 2.80 24.0 0.06 0.04 5.56 5.61 0.04 1.41 1.45 — 6,012 6,012 0.28 0.26 10.7 6,107 Area 4.30 0.02 2.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 6.21 6.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.23 Energy 0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,516 1,516 0.16 0.01 — 1,523 Water — — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4621 Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
12 / 50
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Total 7.28 3.80 26.8 0.07 0.12 5.56 5.69 0.12 1.41 1.53 36.8 7,584 7,621 4.13 0.28 11.9 7,821 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.53 0.51 4.39 0.01 0.01 1.02 1.02 0.01 0.26 0.27 — 995 995 0.05 0.04 1.78 1,011 Area 0.78 < 0.005 0.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 1.03 1.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.03 Energy 0.01 0.18 0.08 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 251 251 0.03 < 0.005 — 252 Water — — — — — — — — — — 0.96 8.28 9.24 0.10 < 0.005 — 12.5 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 5.13 0.00 5.13 0.51 0.00 — 17.9 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.19 0.19
Total 1.33 0.69 4.89 0.01 0.02 1.02 1.04 0.02 0.26 0.28 6.09 1,256 1,262 0.68 0.05 1.97 1,295
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
2.62 24.9 21.7 0.03 1.06 — 1.06 0.98 — 0.98 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — 0.26 0.26 — 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
622
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
13 / 50
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.34 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 46.9 46.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 47.1 Demolitio
n
— — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.06 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.77 7.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.79 Demolitio
n
— — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.04 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 135 135 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.57 137 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.43 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 0.29 0.29 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 — 335 335 0.03 0.05 0.73 353 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.71 1.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.73 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.59 4.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.83 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.29 623
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
14 / 50
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.76 0.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.80
3.3. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.65 36.0 32.9 0.05 1.60 — 1.60 1.47 — 1.47 — 5,296 5,296 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.05 0.49 0.45 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 72.5 72.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 72.8 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.11 0.11 — 0.05 0.05 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
624
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
15 / 50
Off-Road 0.01 0.09 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.1 Equipment
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.05 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.15 0.15 — 157 157 < 0.005 0.01 0.66 160 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.99 1.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.02 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.33 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.33 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e625 Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
16 / 50
Onsite—————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.90 18.2 18.8 0.03 0.84— 0.84 0.77— 0.77— 2,958 2,958 0.12 0.02— 2,969 Dust
From
Material
Movement
————— 2.80 2.80— 1.34 1.34———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Average
Daily
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.21 2.05 2.11 < 0.005 0.09— 0.09 0.09— 0.09— 332 332 0.01 < 0.005— 333 Dust
From
Material
Movement
————— 0.31 0.31— 0.15 0.15———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.37 0.39 < 0.005 0.02— 0.02 0.02— 0.02— 55.0 55.0 < 0.005 < 0.005— 55.2 Dust
From
Material
Movement
————— 0.06 0.06— 0.03 0.03———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite—————————————————
626
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
17 / 50
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.04 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 135 135 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.57 137 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.19 11.8 5.59 0.06 0.17 7.85 8.02 0.11 2.02 2.13 — 9,143 9,143 0.75 1.47 19.8 9,620 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 14.0 14.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.02 1.37 0.63 0.01 0.02 0.87 0.89 0.01 0.22 0.24 — 1,027 1,027 0.08 0.17 0.96 1,080 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.32 2.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.35 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.25 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 0.16 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 170 170 0.01 0.03 0.16 179
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 627
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
18 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 — 0.50 0.46 — 0.46 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.33 3.10 3.62 0.01 0.14 — 0.14 0.13 — 0.13 — 662 662 0.03 0.01 — 664 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.06 0.57 0.66 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 110 110 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 110 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.08 1.34 0.00 0.00 1.02 1.02 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 269 269 0.01 0.01 1.14 273 Vendor 0.01 0.33 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 — 243 243 0.01 0.04 0.64 255 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.10 1.14 0.00 0.00 1.02 1.02 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 246 246 0.01 0.01 0.03 249 Vendor 0.01 0.35 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 — 243 243 0.01 0.04 0.02 254 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
628
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
19 / 50
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.07 0.07 — 68.5 68.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 69.6 Vendor < 0.005 0.10 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 67.1 67.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.08 70.3 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 11.3 11.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.5 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.1 11.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.6 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.9. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.40 3.72 4.64 0.01 0.15 — 0.15 0.14 — 0.14 — 854 854 0.03 0.01 — 857 629
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
20 / 50
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.07 0.68 0.85 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 141 141 0.01 < 0.005 — 142 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.11 0.07 1.25 0.00 0.00 1.02 1.02 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 263 263 < 0.005 0.01 1.04 267 Vendor 0.01 0.32 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 — 239 239 0.01 0.03 0.63 251 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.10 0.09 1.06 0.00 0.00 1.02 1.02 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 241 241 0.01 0.01 0.03 244 Vendor 0.01 0.33 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 0.06 0.06 — 239 239 0.01 0.03 0.02 250 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.09 0.09 — 86.7 86.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 88.1 Vendor < 0.005 0.12 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 85.3 85.3 < 0.005 0.01 0.10 89.1 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 14.4 14.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.6 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.1 14.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 14.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 630
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
21 / 50
3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 — 0.35 0.32 — 0.32 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,517 Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.10 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 20.7 20.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 20.8 Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.43 3.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.44 Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
631
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
22 / 50
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 132 132 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.52 134 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.67 1.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.70 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Architectural Coating (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.91 1.15 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings
9.91 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 632
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
23 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.91 1.15 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings
9.91 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.23 0.28 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 33.2 33.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 33.3 Architectu
ral
Coatings
2.46 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.49 5.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.51 Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.45 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 53.7 53.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 54.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00633 Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
24 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 49.1 49.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 49.8 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 12.3 12.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.04 2.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.07 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.15. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings
9.91 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 634
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
25 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectu
ral
Coatings
9.91 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.05 0.34 0.43 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 51.0 51.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 51.1 Architectu
ral
Coatings
3.78 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.44 8.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.46 Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.69 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 52.7 52.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.21 53.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00635 Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
26 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 48.2 48.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 48.8 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 18.6 18.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 18.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.08 3.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
3.22 2.60 27.8 0.06 0.04 5.69 5.74 0.04 1.44 1.49 — 6,547 6,547 0.26 0.25 25.5 6,654 Total 3.22 2.60 27.8 0.06 0.04 5.69 5.74 0.04 1.44 1.49 — 6,547 6,547 0.26 0.25 25.5 6,654 636
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
27 / 50
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
3.02 3.06 25.5 0.06 0.04 5.69 5.74 0.04 1.44 1.49 — 6,097 6,097 0.30 0.28 0.66 6,188 Total 3.02 3.06 25.5 0.06 0.04 5.69 5.74 0.04 1.44 1.49 — 6,097 6,097 0.30 0.28 0.66 6,188 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.53 0.51 4.39 0.01 0.01 1.02 1.02 0.01 0.26 0.27 — 995 995 0.05 0.04 1.78 1,011 Total 0.53 0.51 4.39 0.01 0.01 1.02 1.02 0.01 0.26 0.27 — 995 995 0.05 0.04 1.78 1,011
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 287 287 0.05 0.01 — 290
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 287 287 0.05 0.01 — 290
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 287 287 0.05 0.01 — 290
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 287 287 0.05 0.01 — 290
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 637
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
28 / 50
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 47.5 47.5 0.01 < 0.005 — 48.0
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 47.5 47.5 0.01 < 0.005 — 48.0
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,230 1,230 0.11 < 0.005 — 1,233 Total 0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,230 1,230 0.11 < 0.005 — 1,233 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,230 1,230 0.11 < 0.005 — 1,233 Total 0.06 0.97 0.41 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,230 1,230 0.11 < 0.005 — 1,233 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
0.01 0.18 0.08 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 204 204 0.02 < 0.005 — 204 Total 0.01 0.18 0.08 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 204 204 0.02 < 0.005 — 204
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 638 Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
29 / 50
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products
3.46 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.62 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landscap
e
Equipme
nt
0.42 0.05 4.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.6 Total 4.51 0.05 4.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 12.6 12.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products
3.46 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architectu
ral
Coatings
0.62 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 4.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consume
r
Products
0.63 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
639
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
30 / 50
Architectu 0.11 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ral
Coatings
Landscap
e
Equipme
nt
0.04 < 0.005 0.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.03 1.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.03 Total 0.78 < 0.005 0.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 1.03 1.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.03
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4
Total — — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4
Total — — — — — — — — — — 5.79 50.0 55.8 0.60 0.02 — 75.4 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 0.96 8.28 9.24 0.10 < 0.005 — 12.5
Total — — — — — — — — — — 0.96 8.28 9.24 0.10 < 0.005 — 12.5 640
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
31 / 50
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108
Total — — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108
Total — — — — — — — — — — 31.0 0.00 31.0 3.10 0.00 — 108 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — 5.13 0.00 5.13 0.51 0.00 — 17.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — 5.13 0.00 5.13 0.51 0.00 — 17.9
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 641
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
32 / 50
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.16 1.16
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.19 0.19
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.19 0.19
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
642
Village at 2092 Oakley Road Detailed Report, 6/20/2023
33 / 50
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —