Agenda packet — Orinda City Council, February 3, 2026

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, February 03, 2026
07:00 PM
Orinda Library Auditorium
26 Orinda Way, Orinda, CA
Zoom Webinar Link: https://www.tinyurl.com/OrindaCityCouncil YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@cityoforinda9535/streams HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING:

In-Person Speaker Cards: If you would like to speak during the public forum or on an item listed on the agenda, you are invited to submit a speaker card to the City Clerk. You will be permitted to speak even if you choose not to submit a speaker card or decline to provide the requested information on the card. After the City Council has heard from everyone who submitted a speaker card, anyone who has not submitted a speaker card may form a line at the lectern. Public comment is generally limited to 3 minutes per speaker per agenda item.

Written Comments: You may also submit a public comment in advance of the meeting by following the instructions below:

Deliver to City Hall at 22 Orinda Way or send an e-mail to [email protected] by 3 pm on the day of the meeting. Those comments will be forwarded to the City Council. They will also be part of the public record and available for viewing in the public review binder at Orinda City Hall, located at 22 Orinda Way. In addition, they will be available electronically by 5 pm on the day of the meeting by selecting the date of the meeting in this Box account link: https://tinyurl.com/Orinda-Public-Comment Remote Comments: Remote Public Comments have been discontinued for the foreseeable future. This does not include teleconference locations.

Assisted Listening Devices: Assisted listening devices are available on the table in the rear of the Auditorium.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Councilmembers: Cara Hoxie, Latika Malkani, Janet Riley Vice Mayor Darlene Gee, Mayor Brandyn Iverson

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A.

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
The City Council may take action on any item listed on the agenda.

ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
Recognition of Black History Month

PUBLIC FORUM
The public forum provides an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of the City Council that is not on the agenda. Additionally, a speaker has the option of addressing the Council on an item listed on the agenda, if the speaker will not be present when that agenda item is taken up. When an item is not listed on the agenda, State law prohibits Council discussion or action. Councilmembers may only “briefly respond” to statements made and questions posed. For example, State law allows Councilmembers to ask questions for clarification and provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information. Additionally, consistent with the “Matters Initiated” rule contained in its Policies and Procedures Manual, the Council may also direct staff to report back and/or place a matter on a future agenda for discussion.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of City Council Minutes Page 6
The City Council will consider approval of the Meeting Minutes of January 13, 2026, and January 20, 2026.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve City Council Minutes of:

1. January 13, 2026, Regular Meeting

2. January 20, 2026, Regular Meeting
Traffic Order to Authorize Orinda Way Street Closure for Farmers’ Market

Page 27 ends

The City Council will consider adoption of a traffic order to close a portion of Orinda Way every Saturday between 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. from February 7, 2026 to March 31, 2028, excluding July 4, 2026, for the Contra Costa Certified Farmers’ Market.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 07-26 Authorizing the Closure of a Portion of Orinda Way (Traffic Order No. 240) to vehicular traffic to allow for space for farmers' market vendors.

Public Hearing: Ordinance 26-02 Amending Title 17 of the Orinda C.

D.1
E.

F.1
F.2
F.3
Packet Page 2
Municipal Code to Implement Housing Element Program Actions

1.A, 1.B, and 1.J Regarding Streamlined Approvals for Affordable Housing
The City Council will consider an ordinance to make changes to Title 17 of the Orinda Municipal Code to implement certain Housing Element program actions.

Specifically, the ordinance codifies State mandates requiring streamlined approval for multifamily housing developments on certain Housing Element sites, provided the project includes at least 20 percent affordability for lower-income households. The proposed Ordinance would not alter the uses allowed or the procedures Staff would otherwise follow, as State law already mandates these streamlining provisions.

RECOMMENDATION:

Waive the full reading of the text and introduce Ordinance 26-02 amending Title 17 of the Orinda Municipal Code to implement Housing Element Program Actions 1.A,

1.B, and 1.J regarding streamlined approvals for affordable housing for certain Housing Element sites.

PUBLIC HEARING
Introduction of Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance 26-01, and Draft General Plan Map Amendment Resolution 01-26, and Draft Plan Orinda Revised Final EIR and CEQA Consistency Resolution 02-26, Regarding Amendments to the General Plan and Zoning for 23 Altarinda Road

Page 41 ends

The City Council will consider the introduction of Ordinance 26-01, a proposed zoning change to 23 Altarinda Road, a .60 acre (approx. 26,136 sq. ft.) site located on the north side of Altarinda Road within the area studied in the certified Revised Final EIR (Final EIR) for Plan Orinda and within a half mile of the Orinda BART station. Concurrent with the action to approve the zoning change would be an amendment to the General Plan. The General Plan and zoning designation changes were included as part of Plan Orinda and evaluated in the Final EIR.

If the City Council introduces Ordinance 26-01, Resolutions 01-26 and 02-26 would be brought back for consideration of adoption with that action.

RECOMMENDATION:

Take the following actions:

1. Waive the full reading and introduce Ordinance 26-01 Amending the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation for 23 Altarinda Road (APN 260-192-013) from G.

G.1
Packet Page 3
“DO (Downtown Office)” to “DG (Downtown General).”

2. Direct staff to bring back for adoption Resolution 01-26 Amending the General Plan Map to change the land use designation from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown – General” for 23 Altarinda Road (APN 260-192-013).

3. Direct staff to bring back for adoption Resolution 02-26 Affirming the Consistency of the 23 Altarinda Road Project with Plan Orinda and its certified revised Final EIR; Adopting Findings Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Those Impacts that were Found to be Significant and Unavoidable.

POLICY MATTERS
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2024-2025

Page 132 ends

The Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) provides advisory and oversight support to the City Council and City staff regarding revenues generated by the voter-approved one percent Supplemental Sales Tax (Measure R, 2020). The Commission reviews, monitors, and reports on planned and actual expenditures for priority programs, services, and projects.

This Annual Report covers Fiscal Year 2024–2025 and summarizes audit and financial information within the Commission’s purview. It highlights SSTOC oversight of priority programs related to wildfire risk reduction, disaster preparedness and emergency response, storm drainage infrastructure, and long-term road maintenance.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive Report.

State Housing Legislation and Housing Element Implementation Update – 2025 Calendar Year

Page 177 ends

Receive a presentation and discuss the recent State housing legislation and Housing Element implementation activities.

RECOMMENDATION:

The City Council will receive a presentation on recent State legislation and a summary of the Housing Element implementation activities as a preview to submitting the state-mandated Annual Progress Report no later than April 1, 2026.

H.1
H.2
Packet Page 4

COUNCILMEMBERS' REPORTS

CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

MATTERS INITIATED

ADJOURNMENT
Please visit the City's website at www.cityoforinda.org to view the City Council Meeting Calendar.

I, Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that this special meeting agenda has been posted at least 24 hours in advance at the Orinda City Hall, 22 Orinda Way and the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way. Additional copies are available at the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way, and at the City's website at www.cityoforinda.org. At Least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, this agenda was also delivered to and received by each member of the City Council as well as each local newspaper, radio station and television station requesting written notice of special meetings.

I, Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that this regular meeting agenda has been posted at least 72 hours in advance at the Orinda City Hall, 22 Orinda Way and the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way. Additional copies are available at the Orinda Library, 26 Orinda Way, and at the City's website at www.cityoforinda.org
~Notices~
There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in Court to certain City decisions that require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence, and the exercise of discetion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure 1094.6). Further, if you file a challenge in Court, you may be limited by California law, including but not limited to Government Code 65009, to those issues raised in connection with the public hearing. The City Council may be requested to reconsider a decision if the request is made prior to the next City Council meeting. For information on the next City Council meeting, please call 925.253.4221 or visit the website at www.cityoforinda.org. Unless otherwise noted, City Council actions include a determination that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply. ~Accessible Public Meetings~
The City of Orinda will provide special assistance for disabled citizens to participate in public meetings upon advance notice. If you need auxiliary hearing aid or sign language assistance at least two (2) working days advanced notice is necessary. Please contact the City Clerk's Office, 22 Orinda way, Orinda, CA 94563 or 925.253.4221 or [email protected] with the following information: name, mailing address, phone number and type of assistance requested.

Packet Page 5

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: Administration
Meeting Date: February 3, 2026
SUBJECT:

Approval of City Council Minutes
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider approval of the Meeting Minutes of:

1. January 13, 2026, Regular Meeting

2. January 20, 2026, Regular Meeting
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve City Council Minutes of:

1. January 13, 2026, Regular Meeting

2. January 20, 2026, Regular Meeting
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Not Applicable.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. City Council Minutes of January 13, 2026
B. City Council Minutes of January 20, 2026

Respectfully Submitted by,
Sheri Smith, City Clerk
Approved By:

Linda Smith, City Manager
Item F.1
Packet Page 6
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 14 01.13.26
JANUARY 13, 2026

CITY OF ORINDA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Note: Written communications received from the public prior to the start of this meeting can be viewed on the City’s website meeting calendar. They are also kept in the City Clerk’s Office as part of the public record and available upon request ([email protected]). 7:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING– ORINDA LIBRARY AUDITORIUM
A. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL:

Mayor Malkani called the Regular Meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m.

COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Cara Hoxie, Latika Malkani, Janet Riley (participating via Zoom)
Mayor Brandyn Iverson, Vice Mayor Darlene Gee
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Mayor Iverson.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Mayor Iverson recommended a temporary change to see if the Council likes it, which would be to bring Councilmember Reports and City Manager Report to the front of the agenda after the Consent Calendar and before the Public Hearing. Councilmembers voiced support.

MOTION by Councilmember Hoxie, and seconded by Councilmember Malkani, to adopt the agenda, as amended. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY
D.1 Introduction of Sophie Foster – New Planning Technician Planning Director Lashun Cross introduced Sophie Foster, the City’s new Planning Technician and described her education, previous experience, and hobbies.

Planning Technician Sophie Foster said she is thrilled to be joining the City of Orinda, said she has been pursuing a career path in planning for a bit, and is fortunate to start her journey with Orinda. She looks forward to working with Orinda employees and the Council.

Mayor Iverson and Councilmembers welcomed Ms. Foster to the City.

E. PUBLIC FORUM
Item F.1
Packet Page 7
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 14 01.13.26
Resident Bill Waterman expressed longstanding support for the proposed Chevron convenience store, highlighting its value as a late-night retail option similar to successful Extra Mile locations nearby. He noted the project provides a public benefit through creek access dedication and emphasized that the agreement, carefully drafted by the City Attorney and outside counsel, protects the City from environmental liability. He concluded that the benefits outweigh any drawbacks, viewing the project as a positive opportunity, especially given the site’s long-term vacancy and the limited new commercial development in Orinda over the past 20 years.

Laura Abrams voiced strong opposition to the project, expressing disappointment that prior staff reports did not address the repeal of the former ordinance, the prior City Council’s intent, or the community and School District support at the time of its adoption.

She noted that her previous testimony and written submission—including photographs of a Danville Extra Mile store highlighting a focus on alcohol, tobacco, and junk food—were not meaningfully considered. She raised concerns about the project’s long-term legacy, potential traffic impacts, and uncertain consequences, particularly in light of Orinda’s small-community character and existing gas stations, and urged the Council to carefully reconsider the proposal.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Iverson announced that written correspondence includes a staff correction for Item F.5, and asked if Councilmembers or the public wished to remove any other items or had public comments. There were no requests for items to be removed or public comments.

F.1 Approval of City Council Minutes
The City Council will consider approval of the Minutes from the December 16, 2025, Meeting.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve City Council Minutes of December 16, 2025.

F.2 Accept Work and Contract with Miksis Services, Inc. for Orinda Way Storm Drain Lining Project (CIP #4111)
The City Council will consider Resolution No. 03-26 to Accept Work and Contract with Miksis Services, Inc. for the Orinda Way Storm Drain Lining Project.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 03-26 to Accept said Work and Contract.

F.3 Award of Bid to Eric F. Anderson, Inc. for the Library Exterior Accent Tile Replacement (CIP #4179)
The City Council will consider awarding a bid to Eric F. Anderson, Inc. (EFA) for the Library tile replacement work. This recommendation follows a competitive bid process where the City opened five bids on December 9, 2025, four of which were found to be non-responsive, leaving EFA as the lowest responsive bidder.

RECOMMENDATION:

Take the following actions:

Item F.1
Packet Page 8
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 14 01.13.26

1. Reject non-responsive bids;

2. Award a construction contract to lowest responsive bidder, Eric F.

Anderson, Inc. (EFA) for the Library Exterior Accent Tile Project, including a contingency of 15%; and

3. Approve Budget Change Form #008-26.

F.4 Changes to the Orinda Municipal Code to Reflect 2025 California Building Code Update
The City Council will hold a second reading and consider adoption of Ordinance 25-07 to formally adopt the 2025 California Building Standards Codes with locally necessary modifications and confirm the action is exempt from CEQA. The Council will also consider adoption of Resolution 63-25 approving Contra Costa County’s Findings of Fact supporting the need for these local amendments. If approved, Staff will transmit the adopted documents to the appropriate state and local agencies.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the following:

Ordinance 25-07, waiving full reading, adopting the 2025 California Building, Residential, Energy, Historical Building, Existing Building, Green Building Standards, Electrical, Mechanical, and Plumbing Codes with Modifications for Local Conditions, which includes a determination that it is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (”CEQA”).

Resolution 63-25 adopting Contra Costa County’s Findings of Fact regarding the need for the modifications to the provisions of the 2025 California Building Standards Code made in the Orinda Municipal Code.

F.5 Award of Bid/Construction Contract to Keep IT Simple (KIS) for installation of security enhancements at City Hall
The City Council will consider awarding a construction contract to Keep IT Simple (KIS) to improve security and door access at City Hall and the Police Department. Staff opened three bids on December 10, 2025, reviewed the bids and recommends awarding the construction contract to the lowest responsive bidder.

RECOMMENDATION:

Award a construction contract to KIS for the installation of Verkada Security Cameras and door access in the Police Department and City Hall, authorize a contingency of 15%, and approve Budget Change Form #009-26.

F.6 Award of On-Call Traffic Signal and Street Light Maintenance Services Contract to DC. Electric Group, Inc.

The City Council will consider an updated contract with DC Electric Group, Inc. for the on-call traffic signal and street light maintenance efforts.

The work includes regular equipment check-outs and as-needed maintenance/repairs of this electrical infrastructure and responding to emergency call outs when signal facilities are damaged from storms or traffic accidents and marking underground electric facilities in response to USA notifications (underground service alert).

Item F.1
Packet Page 9
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 14 01.13.26
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 04-26 Approving Exception to Competitive Bidding per Orinda Municipal Code Section 2.55.100, and Awarding an On-Call Traffic Signal and Street Light Maintenance Services Contract to DC Electric Group, Inc.

F.7 Approval of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Grant Application for Fiscal Year 2026-2027
The City Council will consider approving the Grant Application for Camino Pablo Pathway Rehabilitation from Ardilla Road to Claremont Avenue to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Funding.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution No. 05-26, Authorizing the City to Apply to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding for the Camino Pablo Pathway Rehabilitation Project, Ardilla Road to Claremont Avenue.

MOTION by Councilmember Malkani moved, and seconded by Vice Mayor Gee to approve Consent Calendar Items F.1, F.2, F.3, F.4, F.5, F.6, and F.7. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) vote.

I. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS
Councilmember Malkani reported that the Infrastructure Committee, with Vice Mayor Gee and staff, reviewed Orinda Woods HOA roads maintained under a City agreement, examined alternative approaches from other cities, and discussed San Anselmo’s grant program for resident-funded road and drainage repairs. The committee also considered updating the City’s public roads ordinance and resolution and recommended bringing the issue to the full Council for a policy discussion.

Vice Mayor Gee reported that the committee also received an update from Public Works staff on drainage mapping that integrates both public and private systems to improve the City’s records, with a future update to be brought to the Council. She noted the committee had a robust, well-attended discussion with strong participation and meaningful progress.

Mayor Iverson reported that five Eagle Scouts were recognized as part of the national program, with Congressman Mark DeSaulnier in attendance for the ceremony. She deferred to the City Manager to report on the grant the City received for the Moraga Way study.

J. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Smith reported the following:

Item F.1
Packet Page 10
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 14 01.13.26
• The City of Orinda and the Town of Moraga jointly applied for the Safe Streets for All Program and received a federal grant of approximately $500,000 to begin the planning study for improvements to Moraga Way that could result in a safer bike and pedestrian access as well as evacuation needs over the long-term. They are grateful for the partnership with the Town of Moraga and they will be working to initiate the work between the two agencies.
• She reported on the new entry way sign along Moraga Way at the entrance to Theater Square, stating today the City received notification that PG&E has approved it.
• The City is prepared to launch www.Orindaready.com tomorrow which will be the new portal for all things related to emergency preparedness, information about insurance and, in addition, staff will also launch the Ladris evacuation and fire modeling tool so residents can better understand the effects of fire spread and evacuation timing in the community. There will be about 100 scenarios pre-planned in the system so people can educate themselves.

Mayor Iverson thanked the City Manager and her team, stating the implementation of the Ladris system was done quickly, was a huge effort, and something there is not a lot of precedent for in a public format.

G. PUBLIC HEARING
G.1 Introduction of Ordinance 25-06, to amend Section 17.2.3 (Definitions) and Section 17.8.5 (Downtown commercial district—Use restrictions) of the City’s Planning and Zoning Code for Convenience Markets and Other Ancillary Retail Uses at Service Stations.

The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the re-introduction of an ordinance originally introduced by the City Council in September 2023 that modifies regulations for convenience markets and ancillary retail uses at service stations in response to an application by Chevron.

Although the ordinance was previously introduced, more than two years have elapsed between the first and anticipated second reading, and during that time the City adopted amendments to Chapter 17.8 of the Orinda Municipal Code as part of the Downtown rezoning effort. Out of an abundance of caution, and to ensure consistency with the City’s current zoning framework, Staff is recommending re-introduction of the ordinance.

The substance of the ordinance remains unchanged from that previously introduced. In addition, staff for Chevron and the City have reached agreement on the terms of an offer of dedication and donation by Chevron.

Those items are presented for the City Council’s information and comment.

RECOMMENDATION:

Take the following actions:

1. Waive the full reading of the text; and
Item F.1
Packet Page 11
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 14 01.13.26

2. Introduce Ordinance 25-06 amending Section 17.2.3 (Definitions) and Section 17.8.5 (Downtown Commercial District—Use Restrictions) of the Orinda Municipal Code to update regulations governing convenience markets and ancillary retail uses at service stations; and

3. Review and provide comment on the negotiated offer of dedication and donation.

City Attorney Osa Wolff provided hearing process procedures and protocols. She called on any Council ex-parte communications.

Mayor Iverson and Councilmembers disclosed their ex-parte communications which occurred only for Mayor Iverson and Vice Mayor Gee as included in the staff report.

Associate Planner Darin Hughes presented a staff report reintroducing an ordinance first introduced in September 2023 to amend zoning regulations for convenience markets at service stations, prompted by a Chevron application. He reviewed the project’s history, including Planning Commission and Council study sessions since 2021, design revisions, application withdrawal and resubmittal under AB 2097, and Chevron’s proposed right-ofway donation.

He noted the Planning Commission’s July 2023 approval, contingent on the Zoning Text Amendment, and subsequent Council-requested analysis of the dedication. By summer 2025, dedication negotiations were complete, a Phase I environmental assessment conducted, and the project returned to the Council. He summarized the proposed amendments to Sections 17.2.3 (Definitions) and 17.8.5 (Downtown Commercial District Use Restrictions), the San Pablo Creek dedication, public correspondence, and site setbacks and connections.

Next steps include scheduling second reading and adoption at the January 20, 2026 Council meeting, after which the City Manager would accept the donation and record the dedication. Staff recommends waiving the full reading, introducing Ordinance 25-06, and reviewing and commenting on the negotiated dedication and donation.

Councilmember Malkani asked about the rationale for requiring the store entrance to be no more than 35 feet from the public sidewalk and whether the ordinance could omit this requirement without reintroduction. City Manager Smith confirmed that modifications could be made that evening before adoption, and Mr. Hughes explained the basis for the 35-foot maximum setback, as well as related use permit and design review requirements, noting that further revisions could also be made in the future.

Councilmember Riley asked what Mr. Hughes meant by resolving existing setbacks at other gas stations during planning. Mr. Hughes explained that if the 35-foot requirement were removed, staff could address pedestrian connections and site orientation during design review on a case-by-case basis for each project.

Councilmember Riley asked and confirmed there is one EV charging station.

Item F.1
Packet Page 12
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 7 of 14 01.13.26
Vice Mayor Gee asked if there is an actual definition of “fresh food.” Mr. Hughes said this was discussed at the Planning Commission hearing. He crafted a list of what might encompass fresh food and a definition, as well as exploration of minimum flood space that would be required for fresh food. It was determined that was potentially overcomplicating things when they have limited resources for code enforcement.

Councilmember Malkani raised concerns about public safety and crime, recalling prior discussions with the Police Chief. Chief Rossi confirmed there is no data linking convenience stores in Orinda—or neighboring cities—to increased crime, noting that while there are calls for service, they do not indicate higher crime at these locations.

Councilmember Hoxie asked about crime trends at convenience stores in other cities and security system requirements. Chief Rossi said it is difficult to link expansions of existing stations to increased crime, and that security system details are determined by the applicant. City Manager Smith added that the Police Department uses crime prevention through environmental design, collaborating with retailers on layouts and systems to reduce risks.

Mayor Iverson asked whether revising the ordinance to allow all four convenience stores easier access would raise police concerns. Chief Rossi stated he had no concerns, noting that current staffing and response levels are sufficient to manage any potential impacts.

Councilmember Riley questioned the origin and purpose of the 20% rule and the 2,200– 3,000 square foot size requirement, expressing concern that other stations may not be able to meet it. Mr. Hughes explained that a 20% maximum is a common planning standard used to limit certain uses on a parcel and aligns with the City’s interest in controlling convenience store size. The square footage range was originally proposed by Chevron and was less evaluated for other stations, which may face constraints unless service bays are converted. He added that the City currently allows up to 40% maximum size but does not hold a strong position on this specific limitation.

Councilmember Riley further questioned why the 20% would be added to the 2,200-3,000 square foot size, and confirmed this was likely site specific because Chevron proposed this initially. Mr. Hughes added that at this stage he was not sure it would make sense to keep it included.

Mayor Iverson asked about potential incremental sales tax from the project. City Manager Smith explained that state law prohibits disclosing sales tax for individual businesses, allowing only aggregated reporting across multiple businesses. She added that property improvements would likely increase property tax revenue.

Item F.1
Packet Page 13
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 8 of 14 01.13.26
Mayor Iverson also raised concerns about the “fresh food” requirement, noting public apprehension that the focus could shift to alcohol and snacks rather than actual food, and asked how expectations could be balanced without overregulation. Mr. Hughes clarified that while the City does not enforce strict requirements, “fresh food” is envisioned as graband-go items like fruit, sandwiches, and vegetables, acknowledging that alcohol and snack sales would likely also occur. Councilmember Malkani noted that Extra Mile stores typically have consistent offerings, and staff deferred further details to the applicant.

Councilmember Hoxie asked if public restrooms would be available, and Mr. Hughes deferred to the applicant.

Mayor Iverson called upon the applicant.

Jessie Burdowski, District Sales Manager for Chevron, requested City Council approval of revisions to the Orinda Municipal Code necessary to advance Chevron’s renovation project at 11 Orinda Way. She noted the project was previously approved, but is returning for a new first reading due to the passage of time and regulatory changes. Chevron has worked with City staff for over six years to address Council conditions, including an offer of dedication of creek-adjacent land, a pedestrian access easement, and a voluntary $24,874 donation to support pedestrian-friendly initiatives despite changes in state parking laws.

She emphasized Chevron’s commitment to safety, cleanliness, and consistent operations, and highlighted project benefits such as upgraded restrooms, extended-hour convenience offerings, improved aesthetics, a creek overlook deck, pedestrian-oriented design, bike parking, EV charging, and enhanced food and beverage options. She noted the City now has up to 10 years to execute the land dedication. Ms. Burdowski thanked staff and Council and urged approval of the ordinance amendments, stating the project would support a more vibrant and pedestrian-friendly downtown Orinda.

Councilmember Hoxie asked Ms. Burdowski to address security, alcohol sales compliance, and the potential for enhanced food and beverage offerings at the proposed convenience store. Ms. Burdowski outlined Chevron’s robust, standardized security measures, including a global security team, employee training, surveillance, regular assessments, and coordination with law enforcement, stating confidence that the store would not encourage crime.

In response to concerns about underage alcohol sales, Ms. Burdowski emphasized Chevron’s zero-tolerance policy and strict compliance practices, including frequent mystery shopper programs, mandatory ID scanning for customers under 30, and strong employee accountability. She confirmed alcohol sales would comply with state restrictions, with no sales between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m., and that store hours would be 24 hours per day.

Item F.1
Packet Page 14
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 9 of 14 01.13.26
Regarding food and beverage offerings, Ms. Burdowski explained that Extra Mile stores maintain a consistent product model with some flexibility by location. She described available fresh deli items, hot food options, and a high-quality coffee program, noting adherence to strict food safety standards. She also stated that public restrooms are provided and maintained to a high cleanliness standard. Finally, she confirmed that the signage shown in the project plan reflects what is proposed.

Vice Mayor Gee asked and confirmed the current attendant space will be turned into a dispenser.

Councilmember Riley asked about seating, creek access, and parking at the proposed site. Ms. Burdowski stated that there will be 12 seats, all located outdoors, and that the observation area provides access to the creek via an easement. She explained that the project includes 10 designated parking spaces, with the fuel dispensers functioning as an additional 12 parking spaces.

Councilmember Riley also referenced the Santa Maria Way and Orinda Way area, confirming that it will be landscaped and designed to allow two vehicles to park in tandem in front of that area.

Mayor Iverson opened the Public Forum.

Brian Hubinger stated that he works for Chevron and passes the station daily, expressing support for refreshing and modernizing the site. He noted that as a parent who regularly waits nearby while dropping his child off at the soccer field, he sees value in the proposed improvements and views the project as a positive example for the City. He urged the Council to approve the modernization, citing the benefits it would bring to the community.

Mike McGill said he is a licensed civil engineer, complimented the City staff for all of the work they have done with this project, and said the Chamber has voted to support this project. They think it will add to the ambience of this part of the City, offers many features, and urged the Council to adopt staff’s recommendation tonight.

Alex Evans, a 26-year Orinda resident, supported the ordinance, noting that without approval the existing store would remain unchanged. He emphasized that the project offers modest improvements without major disruption, praised the thorough review process, and urged the Council to approve the ordinance to enhance the site for residents and benefit the City.

Sandy Roadcap voiced support for the project and amended ordinance, citing economic, environmental, and community benefits, as well as the removal of existing eyesores. She encouraged approval of the ordinance and negotiated offer of dedication, noting successful compromises on fresh food offerings. Ms. Roadcap emphasized the need to adapt to changing conditions and commended the Council’s focus on pedestrian safety, evacuation, and wildfire preparedness.

Item F.1
Packet Page 15
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 10 of 14 01.13.26
Roy Hodgkinson, Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce and a long-time resident, thanked the Council, staff, and public for their work on the project and ordinance amendments. He expressed support for both, noting the ordinance changes are reasonable, specific, and narrowly scoped, with limited downside. He stated that clear and predictable regulations encourage investment, particularly in revitalizing underused commercial properties, and viewed Chevron’s willingness to rebuild the site as a positive signal that investment in Orinda is welcome and justified.

Ryan Kroll, attorney for Rebel Convenience (Shell station opposite Chevron), spoke with GM Max Seck and expressed support for the ordinance except for the 35-foot maximum distance to the sidewalk. He requested removing this provision, arguing it is arbitrary, does not meaningfully affect pedestrian access, and that police raised no concerns. He noted façade changes would still undergo design review, maintaining oversight.

Councilmember Malkani asked if increasing the limit to 60 feet would gain their support.

Mr. Kroll said any adjustment must allow all four existing locations to comply without costly demolition, suggesting either removal of the limit or a uniform standard.

Councilmember Riley asked about the 2,200–3,000 sq. ft. size limit. Mr. Kroll noted the Shell store is slightly over 3,000 sq. ft. and while adjustments might be possible, removing the limit entirely would be simpler; this was a lesser concern than the 35-foot requirement.

Councilmember Riley also asked about the service station area, and Mr. Kroll confirmed the car service area would likely be removed, while the car wash would remain.

Juliet Don, a longtime Orinda resident, supported Ordinance 25-06, noting it would enable the Orinda Chevron project to proceed with community benefits such as a modernized station, expanded food offerings, a creek overlook deck, and the City’s first EV charging station at a service station. She addressed concerns about crime and walkability, citing police consultation and Chevron’s security measures, and expressed overall support for the text amendments and project.

Rebuttal - Applicant
Jessie Burdowski, District Sales Manager for Chevron, expressed strong support for the proposed project, highlighting its alignment with Orinda’s downtown revitalization and business growth goals. She emphasized that the project will enhance the community by expanding food offerings, providing convenient retail options, and transforming an existing service bay into a distinctive, community-focused store that maintains the traditional main street character.

She noted that the design has been carefully tailored over several years based on community input and City feedback, resulting in a store unique to Orinda rather than typical of Chevron’s network. While the project team prefers to retain certain design elements developed in compliance with current ordinance standards, they are willing to support necessary ordinance adjustments to move the project forward.

Item F.1
Packet Page 16
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 11 of 14 01.13.26
Ms. Burdowski concluded that the project represents a “win/win,” offering improved aesthetics, expanded products, a creek overlook deck, and EV charging, and expressed hope that the Council will recognize these benefits and approve the required ordinance modifications.

Councilmember Hoxie asked and confirmed that Wi-Fi has not been discussed but will be added as a follow-up item by Ms. Burdowski.

Mayor Iverson closed the public hearing and turned to discussion and direction.

Councilmembers acknowledged and appreciated public input reflecting current community perspectives on development, noting that some concerns may stem from unwarranted fears. They highlighted the project’s benefits, convenience for patrons, and the applicant’s responsiveness in addressing security and ABC issues, as well as delivering an attractive design. Members expressed openness to revisiting the 35-foot rule after project completion, considering flexibility on square-footage limitations, and recognized the numerous revisions made. They also noted that the ordinance had been previously approved and was being revisited after many years, and thanked the applicant for the changes.

Mayor Iverson proposed, for the second reading, adding use permit findings to ensure quality by requiring projects to be pedestrian-oriented, consistent with the Downtown Precise Plan, and supportive of biking and walking, noting these could be as effective as square footage limits or the 35-foot setback. She added that if there is no Council support, she would be amenable to addressing the issue later.

City Manager Smith stated she would refer the question of using the CUP process to address aesthetic or site-planning issues to the City Attorney.

City Attorney Osa Wolff directed the Council to the proposed ordinance language on packet page 142, outlining criteria for approval permits for this use at the site and potentially others. She explained that the 35-foot requirement, referenced in subsection b.iii, is intended to ensure the site is oriented not only to vehicle access but also to pedestrians. She noted that the 35-foot proximity and parallel wall requirements were previously used to achieve this goal, providing a rational basis for retaining the standard in the ordinance, and stated that the 35-foot figure is not arbitrary or lacking rational justification.

She then suggested language for b.iii state, “The building containing the proposed use shall include a pedestrian entrance oriented to a sidewalk in the public right-of-way,” and she thinks this would get at the same feelings people are describing here but might not have the 35-foot number and the 25-foot wall number.

Item F.1
Packet Page 17
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 12 of 14 01.13.26
Mayor Iverson noted that Councilmembers had not raised concerns about the proposed building size range of 2,250–3,000 square feet versus the 20% limitation and asked whether it should be modified. Councilmembers Malkani and Hoxie expressed no need to change the 20% standard, with Councilmember Hoxie stating the size limits were not objectionable but raising greater concern about the 35-foot requirement and preferring a case-by-case approach to avoid blanket approvals.

City Manager Smith explained that each project would still require a discretionary CUP and, in many cases, site development review, preserving City oversight. She outlined the rationale for the 20% square-footage limit based on site sizes and noted it prevents overly large buildings inconsistent with market and community expectations. Mayor Iverson expressed concern that CUP findings could be too easily met, limiting discretion to achieve high-quality design outcomes.

Staff clarified that site development review would be triggered where building façades or service bays are modified, providing additional review authority. Discussion also addressed concerns about the potential loss of auto service uses citywide, with staff noting the Planning Commission would evaluate cumulative impacts on a case-by-case basis and that appeals could be brought to the Council.

City Attorney Wolff advised that the Council could retain, revise, or remove the 25-foot and 35-foot standards. She recommended, if desired, replacing them with a clearer requirement that buildings include a pedestrian entrance oriented to a public sidewalk, which would preserve pedestrian orientation without relying on specific distance standards.

Councilmember Hoxie confirmed that the Chevron building currently has a single entrance facing the pumps and that the proposed plans include a second entrance facing the sidewalk to comply with subsection iii. She asked whether having two entrances raised safety concerns. Mr. Hughes responded that safety considerations would primarily be the applicant’s responsibility, and noted that the register is located in a corner positioned between the two entrances.

With no consensus initially, Mayor Iverson invited comments from Councilmember Riley and Vice Mayor Gee. Councilmember Riley supported moving forward with the project and deferring any changes to the 35-foot or square-footage standards. Vice Mayor Gee agreed, stating she was comfortable retaining the square-footage provisions and was also open to the City Attorney’s suggested modification.

City Attorney Wolff outlined three options: adopt the ordinance as written, delete subsection iii entirely, or retain iii with more flexible language, recommending consultation with Mr. Hughes. City Manager Smith advised that if the Council wished to continue reviewing individual projects, the ordinance language should remain unchanged, noting that altering the 35-foot requirement could limit review to the Planning Commission.

Item F.1
Packet Page 18
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 13 of 14 01.13.26
Mr. Hughes noted that variances and design review would still be available at the Planning Commission level, though Council review would generally occur only on appeal. He supported revising subsection iii for flexibility, stating staff would support a minor adjustment and characterizing the 35-foot setback as arbitrary.

Councilmember Malkani expressed reluctance to modify subsection iii during the meeting, noting that the discussion reinforced her view that the provision is tied to pedestrian access and not arbitrary. She supported proceeding with the staff recommendation and expressed willingness to revisit the issue in the future. The Council agreed, and she indicated readiness to make a motion.

MOTION by Councilmember Malkani, and seconded by Councilmember Hoxie, to waive the full reading of the text; Introduce Ordinance 25-06 amending Section 17.2.3 (Definitions) and Section 17.8.5 (Downtown Commercial District—Use Restrictions) of the Orinda Municipal Code to update regulations governing convenience markets and ancillary retail uses at service stations. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) vote.

Mayor Iverson asked whether Councilmembers had direction regarding the proposed land dedication and creek easement before proceeding. Councilmember Hoxie suggested deferring the discussion, while Councilmember Malkani stated that a 10-year timeframe was too long and recommended earlier action. With no further Council comments on the dedication or easement, Mayor Iverson noted she would submit her written comments to the City Attorney regarding the drafting of the indemnity provisions and certain “as is” language for Council consideration.

H. POLICY MATTERS
H.1 City Council Committee Appointment/Liaison List for 2026 The City Council is being asked to review and provide feedback on the Mayor‘s proposed 2026 Appointment/Liaison List and approve it as presented or with amendments. In accordance with the Council’s Policy and Procedures Manual, appointments designate Council representatives to serve on subcommittees, regional boards, and as liaisons to partner agencies and City commissions. The proposed list reflects the Mayor’s recommended updates for the upcoming year, and Council discussion will confirm or modify those assignments.

RECOMMENDATION:

Provide any feedback to the Mayor and approve the Appointment/Liaison List as proposed or amended.

City Manager Smith explained that the Mayor annually recommends committee, commission, and liaison appointments, and that she and Mayor Iverson had reviewed the proposed 2026 list, with changes from 2025 shown in red. Mayor Iverson noted receipt of correspondence from the Friends of Orinda Creeks, clarifying that Councilmember Riley is already the designated liaison and that the Council would respond accordingly. With no questions or comments, the Council was invited to approve the list.

Item F.1
Packet Page 19
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 14 of 14 01.13.26
Councilmembers thanked the Mayor for her work, and City Manager Smith added that staff would coordinate with chairs and liaisons, distribute agendas, and that Councilmembers would take primary responsibility for outreach to public agencies and smaller nonprofits.

Mayor Iverson opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

MOTION by Councilmember Hoxie, and seconded by Councilmember Malkani, to approve the Appointment/Liaison List, as proposed. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) vote.

K. MATTERS INITIATED
Mayor Iverson raised the longstanding no-left-turn restriction on Ivy Street as a Matter Initiated. Following Council discussion about potentially removing the sign pending a permanent decision, it was noted that a study session was scheduled to address the issue. The Council agreed to wait for the study session before taking any action.

L. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:30 p.m. to the next Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, January 20, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. ______________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
Item F.1
Packet Page 20
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 1 of 6 01.20.26
JANUARY 20, 2026

CITY OF ORINDA

Mayor Iverson called the Regular Meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m.

COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Cara Hoxie (participating remotely via Zoom), Latika Malkani, Janet Riley
Mayor Brandyn Iverson, Vice Mayor Darlene Gee
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Led by Cub Scout Pack 459.

C. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Mayor Iverson proposed moving the Councilmember and City Manager Reports to be heard before the Consent Calendar and after Public Forum.

MOTION by Mayor Iverson, and seconded by Councilmember Malkani, to adopt the agenda, as amended. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

D. ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY – None.

E. PUBLIC FORUM
Brad McCullough referred to the Consent Calendar item regarding the ordinance and said he is in favor of the changes to the Chevron station, thinks it will be beneficial to the City, thinks the negative statements are conjecture, and asked the Council to approve it.

Bill Waterman said he is speaking as a resident and voiced support of the Chevron station project. He thanked City staff, the City Attorney for working on the indemnity language which is very involved, and said a lot of thought and energy has gone into the project from the City and Chevron. After the many years, he asked the Council to approve it as many people support the project.

I. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS – None.

J. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
Item F.1
Packet Page 21
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 2 of 6 01.20.26
City Manager Smith reported the following updates:
• www.OrindaReady.com has been launched and available to the public, and the City is prepared to hold two facilitated meetings in February for those who want to use it or have questions. Postcards will be mailed to residents to ensure they are aware of the meetings, one of which will be held via Zoom and one meeting in person.
• Touch a Truck event reservations are now open; and
• The Commission and Committee applications are open and she invited people to apply, stating the Council will review applications in February.

F. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Iverson asked if there were any requests to remove Item F.1 and/or public comments. Vice Mayor Gee requested removal of the item to make a few comments, and there was no public comment.

Item Removed from the Consent Calendar:

F.1 Adoption of Ordinance 25-06, amending Section 17.2.3 (Definitions) and Section 17.8.5 (Downtown commercial district – Use restrictions) of the City’s Planning and Zoning Code for Convenience Markets and Other Ancillary Retail Uses at Service Stations
The City Council will consider adoption of Ordinance 25-06, which was introduced at the City Council Meeting of January 13, 2026. Ordinance 25- 06 would modify regulations for convenience markets and ancillary retail uses at service stations in response to an application by Chevron.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Ordinance 25-06, waiving full reading, amending Section 17.2.3 (Definitions) and Section 17.8.5 (Downtown Commercial District – Use Restrictions) of the Orinda Municipal Code to update regulations governing convenience markets and ancillary retail uses at service stations.

Vice Mayor Gee reaffirmed her support for the item and explained it was pulled due to public correspondence suggesting the ordinance would force changes to the Shell Station, which she clarified is not the case unless Shell independently proposes modifications.

City Manager Smith confirmed that the ordinance does not require changes to the existing building, and any future proposal by Shell would be voluntary and subject to City review.

Councilmember Malkani noted that Shell’s existing building does not comply with current setback standards, meaning any changes would require a separate design review and/or variance. Mayor Iverson emphasized that broader land use considerations, such as concentration of use, are appropriately addressed through the discretionary use permit process when an actual application is submitted.

Item F.1
Packet Page 22
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 3 of 6 01.20.26
MOTION by Vice Mayor Gee moved, and seconded by Councilmember Hoxie to approve Consent Calendar Item F.1. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

K. PUBLIC HEARING – None.

L. POLICY MATTERS
H.1 Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with NCE for the Storm Drain Asset Survey and GIS Data Collection Project The City Council will consider approval of Amendment No. 1 to the NCE Professional Services Agreement and a budget increase for the GIS Field Survey and Mapping of Private and Public Storm Drains Project. Field verification work revealed the storm drain system is significantly larger than originally estimated, with over 1,900 additional assets identified and approximately 3,250 more requiring survey.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with NCE for additional storm drain asset field survey and GIS data collection work;

2. Approve Budget Change Form #010-26 increasing the budget from $497,500 to $672,000, which includes a contingency of $87,666 (15%); and Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders within the approved contingency.

Senior Civil Engineer Ha Nguyen presented a staff report on Amendment No. 1 to the NCE Professional Services Agreement for the GIS Field Survey and Mapping of Private and Public Storm Drains Project. The amendment includes a time extension to December 31, 2026, and a budget increase to address expanded project needs. The original contract amount of $497,500 is increased by $186,334, resulting in a revised contract total of $584,334, with a 15% contingency for a total project authorization of $672,000. The project will be funded by Measure R Fund 106. Staff recommends Council approval of the amendment, the associated budget change, and authorization for the City Manager to approve change orders within the approved contingency.

Mayor Iverson opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

City Manager Smith explained that the request reflects an iterative effort to fully inventory storm drain assets, which exceeded initial expectations, and confirmed the item was brought forward in response to prior Infrastructure Committee discussions.

Councilmember Malkani and Vice Mayor Gee emphasized the value of the project in addressing long-standing gaps in storm drain mapping, improving understanding of both public and private systems, and preventing infrastructure failures. Mayor Iverson acknowledged the project’s cost and importance while raising concerns about potential City obligations related to documenting private assets.

Item F.1
Packet Page 23
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 4 of 6 01.20.26
Staff explained that many property owners are unaware of their maintenance responsibilities and that incorporating this information into a GIS system will improve transparency, owner awareness, and system management.

Councilmembers expressed broad support for completing the project, noting its long-term benefits to the City and residents.

MOTION by Vice Mayor Gee moved, and seconded by Councilmember Malkani to approve Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with NCE for additional storm drain asset field survey and GIS data collection work; approve Budget Change Form #010-26 increasing the budget from $497,500 to $672,000, which includes a contingency of $87,666 (15%); and authorize the City Manager to approve change orders within the approved contingency. Said motion carried by unanimous (5-0) roll call vote.

H.2 Study Session
The City Council will hold a study session to further examine housing affordability, including a review of existing State laws/programs designed to encourage affordable development, along with a set of final recommendations for the potential adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance. Staff will review the ordinance language, discuss fee calculation methods and schedule updates. Additionally, Staff will contextualize the impact of an adoption of an ordinance, including the possible number of units created and/or in-lieu fee collected as part of any adopted ordinance.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the presentation, receive public comment, and provide feedback on the pursuit of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO).

Principal Planner Christine Thompson stated she, Director Cross, Planner Hughes, as well as consultant, Lisa Wise Consulting have been involved with this item. She gave background information on the matter, noted the inclusionary housing ordinance (IHO) and affordable housing at large is part of the Housing Element, which was certified in 2023. There have been Council discussions looking into the details of what it would take to adopt an inclusionary housing ordinance in May and October of that year.

At the same time, MTC’s TOC (Transit-Oriented Communities) policy started to take shape in 2024 and in 2025 the City of Orinda went forward with an IHO project to understand all dynamics and assess whether this is right for Orinda or not. And, in 2025, the City had a market study presentation and study sessions.

Ms. Thompson gave a PowerPoint presentation and an overview of a proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) as part of the City’s Housing Element implementation, outlining applicability, affordability requirements, in-lieu fees, incentives, feasibility findings, and administrative framework. The proposal would apply to projects of 11 units or more, require 15% affordability, allow partial construction or in-lieu fees, and generate funding to support affordable housing, with staff seeking Council direction prior to formal adoption.

Item F.1
Packet Page 24
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 5 of 6 01.20.26
Council discussion focused on consistency with regional policies, funding eligibility, feasibility, income targeting, and comparisons with neighboring jurisdictions. Members raised questions regarding the use and timing of in-lieu fees, treatment of rental versus for-sale projects, exemption of single-family housing, project size thresholds, and potential impacts on development viability.

Staff clarified that regional policy targets were informational rather than mandatory, that the ordinance is one of several tools to meet Housing Element and RHNA goals, and that flexibility, waivers, and alternative compliance options could be incorporated. Council also discussed historical housing production, market assumptions, construction cost estimates, and the City’s limited experience with recent multi-family development.

Mayor Iverson opened the Public Forum, and there were no speakers.

Councilmembers expressed general support for adopting an inclusionary housing ordinance but agreed they were not ready to act without further analysis. Key concerns included whether the proposed 15% requirement is too high, appropriate use of in-lieu fees, exemption of single-family homes, feasibility assumptions, and limited local development experience. Several members favored a lower percentage, such as 10% or 12%, and emphasized the need for flexibility and the ability to adjust the ordinance over time.

Vice Mayor Gee and others supported moving forward to avoid the City being perceived as noncompliant, noting that the ordinance can be refined and that developers are likely to rely on density bonuses regardless. Mayor Iverson cautioned against adopting a rigid policy without real development experience, emphasizing competing project cost demands and the importance of allowing developers flexibility in meeting community goals.

The Council reached consensus to continue the discussion through the Council Affordable Housing Subcommittee to further evaluate key policy issues, seek additional input from developers, and refine recommendations. Staff will return with a more developed proposal for future consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.

City Manager Smith confirmed Council direction to continue discussion on considering the 15%, whether to include single-family homes, whether costs in the study were realistic market costs, and input from developers, and the in-lieu fee, unit size, type, and quality of construction, and partial build. Staff can regroup internally and figure out when it would come back to the Council.

Mayor Iverson and Councilmembers thanked staff for their work and staff report, citing the complexity of the matter.

M. MATTERS INITIATED – None.

Item F.1
Packet Page 25
Orinda City Council Minutes Page 6 of 6 01.20.26
N. ADJOURNMENT
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:00 p.m. to the next Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, February 3, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. ______________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
Item F.1
Packet Page 26

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: Public Works/Engineering
Meeting Date: February 3, 2026
SUBJECT:

Traffic Order to Authorize Orinda Way Street Closure for Farmers’ Market EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution 07-26 Authorizing the Closure of a Portion of Orinda Way (Traffic Order No. 240) to vehicular traffic to allow for space for farmers' market vendors.

BACKGROUND:

Since 1997, the Contra Costa Certified Farmers’ Market (CCCFM) has operated a market in Orinda.

On February 7, 2023, the City Council approved a three-year contract with CCCFM which continues the year-round schedule from the previous contract. Negotiations are currently under way for the next contract, which is anticipated to be for another three-year term.

The Market is currently located on a portion of Orinda Way between 27 Orinda Way (Former Rite Aid) and the north end of the Community Park (adjacent to 200 Orinda Way) and operated every Saturday from 9:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m.

The City Council has annually approved traffic orders to accommodate the operation of the Farmers’ Market which allows for a full street closure and “no on street” parking for the portion of Orinda Way along frontage of #27 Orinda Way as shown on Attachment B, on Saturdays between 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

DISCUSSION:

The recommended traffic order Resolution is consistent with the previously approved Traffic Orders. This will maintain the expanded area that was used during the pandemic to allow for additional vendors when necessary. Vehicles will still have full access to all businesses in the area including the Post Office, the site for the future CreekHaus project, and other businesses as the parking lots of 200 Orinda Way and 27 Orinda Way are connected.

Item F.2
Packet Page 27
The Orinda Postmaster is aware of the street closure as their direct driveways will be closed during the event.

The City will continue to provide sufficient barricades and cones for the street closure to the Farmers’ Market personnel.

July 4, 2026, Exclusion
The City Council approves a traffic order annually for street closure of Orinda Way for the July 4th parade hosted by the Orinda Association. In calendar year 2026, July 4th falls on a Saturday. This creates conflict with the Farmers’ Market because the boundary of Farmers’ Market is within the limits of street closure allowed for the July 4th Parade. Due to this reason, Traffic Order #240 excludes the one Saturday on July 4, 2026 and there will no Farmers’ Market that weekend.

Upon approval of the traffic order resolution, Staff will coordinate with the market manager to implement the street closure and implement parking restrictions for the Farmers’ Market.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Not directly related to the traffic order, there will be minor costs associated with Staff onsite to open the park restroom and assist the market staff, vendors, and customers as needed.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

3.f . Organize events and activate public spaces to foster community engagement.

Collaborate with the Chamber of Commerce to support local businesses.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution 07-26 Authorizing the Closure of a Portion of Orinda Way along the frontage of #27 Orinda Way from the Southerly Driveway to the Driveway of #200 Orinda Way
B. Farmers’ Market Street Closure Boundary
Respectfully Submitted by,
Sivakumar Natarajan, City Engineer
Approved By:

Linda Smith, City Manager
Item F.2
Packet Page 28
RESOLUTION NO. 07-26
TRAFFIC ORDER NO. 240

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA

AUTHORIZING THE CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF ORINDA WAY ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF #27 ORINDA WAY FROM THE SOUTHERLY DRIVEWAY TO THE DRIVEWAY OF #200 ORINDA WAY
WHEREAS, the City has worked with Contra Costa Certified Farmers’ Market since 1997 to bring a Saturday morning market to Orinda; and WHEREAS, the operation of the Farmers’ Market requires the full use of the paved portion on Orinda Way from the southerly driveway of #27 Orinda Way to the driveway of #200 Orinda Way; and
WHEREAS, a past engineering study has concluded that the closure of the street and restriction of parking will contribute to safer conditions during the hours of operations of the Farmers' Market; and
WHEREAS, under Section 21101, paragraph (e) of the Vehicle Code, a local authority may adopt by resolution, a temporary closure of a street for a special event when necessary for the safety and protection of the users of the street during the event.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orinda hereby authorizes the street closure and prohibition of all parking, except parking of vehicles that are an integral part of the Farmers’ Market operation, on the portion of Orinda Way from the southerly driveway of #27 Orinda Way to the driveway of #200 Orinda Way every Saturday between 6:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. from February 7, 2026 through March 31, 2028, and excluding July 4, 2026.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting of the Council held on February 3, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Brandyn Iverson, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
Item F.2
Packet Page 29
Northern Boundary
200 Orinda Way
Southern Boundary
27 Orinda Way
Item F.2
Packet Page 30

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: Planning
Meeting Date: February 3, 2026
SUBJECT:

Ordinance 26-02 Amending Title 17 of the Orinda Municipal Code to Implement Housing Element Program Actions 1.A, 1.B, and 1.J Regarding Streamlined Approvals for Affordable Housing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will consider an ordinance to make changes to Title 17 of the Orinda Municipal Code to implement certain Housing Element program actions.

RECOMMENDATION:

Waive the full reading of the text and introduce Ordinance 26-02 amending Title 17 of the Orinda Municipal Code to implement Housing Element Program Actions

1.A, 1.B, and 1.J regarding streamlined approvals for affordable housing for certain Housing Element sites.

BACKGROUND:

On January 31, 2023, the City Council adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031), which was subsequently certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on March 30, 2023. The Housing Element outlines the City’s plan to accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 1,359 units and includes an inventory of sites deemed suitable for accommodating a portion of the RHNA.

Under California Government Code Sections 65583.2(c) and 65583.2(h), local jurisdictions must allow multifamily residential use "by right" on two types of sites identified in the Housing Element’s inventory of sites:

1. Reuse Sites: Vacant sites that have been included in two or more previous consecutive Housing Element cycle that are being used again to meet the current RHNA (Gov. Code § 65583.2(c)).

Item F.3
Packet Page 31

2. Shortfall Sites: Sites that were rezoned to address a deficiency in the initial site inventory (Gov. Code § 65583.2(h)).
"Use by right" means the local government’s review may not require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or other discretionary review that constitutes a "project" under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Projects on these sites must be permitted ministerially if the project proposes at least 20 percent of the units to lower-income households (Gov. Code § 65583.2(i)).

The following Housing Element actions commit the City to ensure compliance with these requirements:

Actions 1.A & 1.B (p. 195 and 196 of the Housing Element):

The City will ensure compliance with Government Code Section 65583, subdivision (c)(1) and 65583.2 subdivisions (h) and (i), as listed below. • Permit owner-occupied and rental multifamily uses by right and will not require a conditional use permit or other discretionary review or approval for developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower income households.

On November 3, 2025, the City Council approved the rezoning of five Opportunity Sites and 26 Downtown sites, which constitute the shortfall sites identified to be rezoned to meet the RHNA requirements. Each of these sites allows multifamily housing by right in the newly created Residential High Density, Downtown Core, and Downtown General zoning districts. The Downtown zoning districts allow, by right and without design review, all multifamily housing that meets objective standards and minimum densities. The Residential High Density zoning district also allows multifamily housing by right; however, development requires that Design Review standards be met “to the extent permitted under state law (Orinda Municipal Code (OMC) Sections 17.3.11, 17.4.35, 17.30.3, & 17.30.11).” All of these sites are subject to 65583.2(h). The proposed Ordinance will confirm compliance.

Action 1.J (p. 202 of the Housing Element):

Sites Used in Previous Housing Element Cycles. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c), a nonvacant site identified in a prior housing element and a vacant site that has been included in two or more consecutive planning periods that was not approved to develop a portion of the locality’s housing need shall not be deemed adequate to accommodate a portion of the housing need for lower Item F.3
Packet Page 32
income households in the current housing element unless the site is zoned at residential densities consistent with the City’s default density and the site is rezoned within three years of the beginning of the planning period to allow residential use by right for housing developments in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower income households.

A portion of the City’s inventory for meeting the lower income categories of the RHNA was met through inclusion of the Santa Maria Church site, located at 40 Santa Maria Way:

This site is vacant and has been included in the past two housing element cycles, meaning it is subject to 65583.2(c). The proposed Ordinance will confirm compliance.

Planning Commission Recommendation
At a public hearing on January 14, 2026, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the proposed Ordinance 26-02 to the City Council (Attachment B). See full agenda, materials, and meeting recording at https://pub-orinda.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=68c65b52-735d-47f0- a787-37184f34b3e2.

DISCUSSION:

Ordinance 26-02 (Attachment A) would add section 17.1.12 to OMC Chapter 17.1 (Purpose and Organization) providing the following clarifications for all sites subject to Government Code 65583.2(c), 65583.2(h), and 65583.2(i):

17.1.12 - Use by right for certain affordable housing developments.

All housing element inventory sites identified by the Department of General Services Housing and Local Land Development Opportunities Map shall comply with State law. In particular:

A. A development is a permitted use by right (non-discretionary), as defined in Government Code Section 65583.2(i), if all the following criteria are met:

1. The site was:
i. Used to accommodate the current lower-income RHNA that is either nonvacant and identified in the previous planning period, Item F.3
Packet Page 33
or vacant and identified in two or more previous consecutive planning periods, pursuant to Government Code Section
65583.2(c), or
i. Rezoned after the start of the planning period pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h).

2. The site is proposed to be developed at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre.

3. The development is proposed to provide at least 20% of the total units in the development as affordable to lower income households.

4. The development meets all applicable objective development and design standards for the zoning district or overlay district in which it is proposed.

B. “Use by right” does not exempt the use from design review; however, design review is limited to ensuring compliance with all applicable objective standards and shall not constitute a "project" under CEQA.

C. Subdivisions remain subject to the Subdivision Map Act.

While City Staff processes all housing applications in accordance with applicable State laws, Ordinance 26-02 is proposed to explicitly demonstrate compliance within the Orinda Municipal Code to address Action Items 1.A, 1.B, and 1.J. This action codifies the statutory requirements for Housing Element sites to require streamlining without discretionary review for development that proposes at least 20 percent will be affordable to lower income households. It does not alter the uses allowed or the procedures Staff would otherwise follow, as State law already mandates these streamlining provisions.

Affected Sites and Future Applicability
The text of the proposed ordinance is drafted to align with the criteria of the Government Code, ensuring that the City's regulations remain in compliance for future Housing Element cycles. These regulations would apply should additional shortfall sites be required during this cycle or future cycles. The proposed location within Chapter 17.1 ensures that the language applies to all relevant sites no matter the zoning district in which they are located.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no material fiscal impact resulting from the introduction of Ordinance 26-

02. STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Not applicable.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Proposed Ordinance 26-02
B. Planning Commission Resolution 26-01
Respectfully Submitted by,
Item F.3
Packet Page 34
Darin Hughes, Associate Planner
Approved By:

Linda Smith, City Manager
Item F.3
Packet Page 35

Page 1 of 3 ends

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
In the Matter of: Ordinance 26-02
An Ordinance Amending Title 17 of the
Orinda Municipal Code to Implement Housing
Element Actions 1.A, 1.B, and 1.J Regarding
Streamlined Approvals for Affordable Housing
The City Council of the City of Orinda DOES ORDAIN as follows:

SECTION 1.

The City Council of the City of Orinda intends, by adopting this ordinance, to amend Chapter 17.1 (Purpose and Organization) of the Orinda Municipal Code to clarify the City’s rules regarding streamlined processing of affordable housing developments subject to Government Code 65583.2(c), 65583.2(h), and 65583.2(i).

SECTION 2.

Chapter 17.1 (Purpose and Organization) of the Orinda Municipal Code is amended to add the following section after Section 17.1.11:

17.1.12 - Use by right for certain affordable housing developments.

All housing element inventory sites identified by the Department of General Services Housing and Local Land Development Opportunities Map shall comply with State law. In particular:

A. A development is a permitted use by right (non-discretionary), as defined in Government Code Section 65583.2(i), if all the following criteria are met:

1. The site was:
i. Used to accommodate the current lower-income RHNA that is either nonvacant and identified in the previous planning period, or vacant and identified in two or more previous consecutive planning periods, pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c), or
i. Rezoned after the start of the planning period pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h).

2. The site is proposed to be developed at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre.

3. The development is proposed to provide at least 20% of the total units in the development as affordable to lower income households.

4. The development meets all applicable objective development and design standards for the zoning district or overlay district in which it is proposed.

C. Subdivisions remain subject to the Subdivision Map Act.

Item F.3
Packet Page 36

Page 2 of 3 ends

SECTION 3 – PURPOSE AND INTENT.

A. The purpose of this ordinance is to clarify that a ministerial, "by-right" approval process applies to multifamily residential developments on specific sites identified in the City's Housing Element. This ordinance confirms there is no requirement for a Conditional Use Permit or other discretionary entitlements for projects that provide at least 20 percent of the units as affordable to lower-income households, limiting municipal review to compliance with objective design and development standards.

B. The intent of this ordinance is to implement Actions 1.A, 1.B, and 1.J of the City’s certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and to satisfy the statutory obligations imposed by California Government Code Sections 65583.2(c) and 65583.2(h). This confirms that the City has removed regulatory barriers to affordable housing production on sites designated to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and to ensure the City’s zoning regulations remain in full compliance with State Housing Law.

SECTION 4.

If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase.

SECTION 5.

This ordinance is consistent with the Orinda General Plan. This ordinance is necessary to implement the Orinda Housing Element and is part of Plan Orinda.

SECTION 6.

The City Council finds this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations) sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378). CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5) excludes from the definition of a project "organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment." Further, this action is exempt from CEQA because the City is required by state law to adopt this ordinance, so the action is not discretionary and is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15378.

SECTION 7.

This ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after adoption.

SECTION 8.

Item F.3
Packet Page 37

Page 3 of 3 ends

The City Clerk shall either (a) have this ordinance published once within fifteen (15) days after adoption in a newspaper of general circulation, or (b) have a summary of this ordinance published twice in a newspaper of general circulation, once five (5) days before its adoption and again within fifteen (15) days after adoption.

Following a duly noticed public hearing, the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on _____ and was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting held on _____ by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Brandyn Iverson, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
1586475.1
Item F.3
Packet Page 38
Item F.3
Packet Page 39
Item F.3
Packet Page 40

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: Planning
Meeting Date: February 3, 2026
SUBJECT:

Introduction of Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance 26-01, and Draft General Plan Map Amendment Resolution 01-26, and Draft Plan Orinda Revised Final EIR and CEQA Consistency Resolution 02-26, Regarding Amendments to the General Plan and Zoning for 23 Altarinda Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The General Plan and zoning designation changes were included as part of Plan Orinda and evaluated in the Final EIR.

If the City Council introduces Ordinance 26-01, Resolutions 01-26 and 02-26 would be brought back for consideration of adoption with that action.

RECOMMENDATION:

Take the following actions:
1) Waive the full reading and introduce Ordinance 26-01 Amending the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation for 23 Altarinda Road (APN 260-192-013) from “DO (Downtown Office)” to “DG (Downtown General).”
2) Direct staff to bring back for adoption Resolution 01-26 Amending the General Plan Map to change the land use designation from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown – General” for 23 Altarinda Road (APN 260-192-013). 3) Direct staff to bring back for adoption Resolution 02-26 Affirming the Consistency of the 23 Altarinda Road Project with Plan Orinda and its certified revised Final EIR; Adopting Findings Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for Those Impacts that were Found to be Significant and Unavoidable.

BACKGROUND:

Item G.1
Packet Page 41
On January 31, 2023, the City Council adopted Plan Orinda. Plan Orinda included the Downtown Precise Plan (rescinded in October 2024 – see below), the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, and Safety Element. The Housing Element and Safety Element are two required elements of the City’s General Plan, which is the blueprint for the community’s long-term vision for the future. Under State law, the Housing Element must be updated every eight years, and the Safety Element must be updated concurrently with the Housing Element. Since adoption of the Housing Element and Safety Element, the City has been working on implementing the goals, policies, and actions.

The Plan Orinda approvals and its Environmental Impact Report (EIR) as prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) were challenged with the filing of Case No. N23-0579 in March 2023. Due to that challenge, the City decertified the EIR and the Statement of Overriding Considerations and rescinded the Downtown Precise Plan in October 2024. The Housing Element and Safety Element remained certified. The Revised Final EIR for Plan Orinda was certified by the Orinda City Council on March 18, 2025, along with a Revised Statement of Overriding Considerations and Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) (Environmental Impact Report (EIR) | Powered by Box).

The Final EIR evaluated future development across multiple sites within the City of Orinda, including residential development for 23 Altarinda Road.

DISCUSSION:

In August 2025, the City received an application from 23 Altarinda Road Investors, LLC. for a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Change for 23 Altarinda Road, a .60 acre (approx. 26,136 sq. ft.) just west of the Orindawoods subdivision. The applicant is requesting approval a General Plan Amendment (from Business and Professional Offices to Downtown – General) and a Zoning Amendment (from DO (Downtown Office) to DG (Downtown General)). These changes would allow housing. At this time, the applicant is not proposing a development project. However, Section 3 of the attached Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Certified Revised Final EIR, Environmental Impact Analysis, describes the analysis already completed in the Final EIR to address potential future development applications, including potential reliance on State Density Bonus law.

The parcel for 23 Altarinda is identified in the Plan Orinda Final EIR as site number 23 and is shown in the map below.

Figure 1: Sites included in the Plan Orinda EIR, including 23 Altarinda Road Item G.1
Packet Page 42
The application for 23 Altarinda is to implement the Zoning and General Plan designations as analyzed in the certified Final EIR. The proposed changes do not have any Item G.1
Packet Page 43
environmental effects that are not already fully examined in the Final EIR, nor are there project-specific significant effects peculiar to the project or the site that were not fully analyzed in the Final EIR.

A detailed analysis to determine the proposed project’s consistency with the Final EIR was prepared and is included as Attachment D. The analysis demonstrated that the proposed project would be consistent with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, and geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure, as described in the Final EIR, and that potential impacts associated with the proposed project would be consistent with potential impacts characterized in and mitigation measures developed for the Final EIR. Based on this, the following determinations are applicable:
• No further evaluation of environmental impacts is required for the Proposed Project.
• No subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration is necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163.
• The consistency analysis completed (Attachment D) is the appropriate level of environmental analysis and documentation for the Proposed Project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c).

Planning Commission Public Hearing
On November 25, 2025, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance, as well as Resolution 01-26 and Resolution 02-26. On the latter, the Planning Commission included a modification to strike sentence in Attachment A as follows, “This alternative would not allow any residential development on the Project site and therefore would not meet the DPP objectives of INSERT.” They cited that the Downtown Precise Plan is currently rescinded, and objectives are not applicable at this time. The Planning Commission voted 3 (ayes), 1 (no), 3 (absent) passing, approving, and adopting the recommendation.

Planning Commission Resolution 25-07 (Attachment E) includes recommendations that the City Council makes the above findings.

Additional Analysis Tools
The City is committed to added evacuation measures to improve safety despite the unavoidable impacts which are deemed acceptable under CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b). The City is using evacuation modeling software from Ladris AI and has made a public portal available for use by the public. The evacuation modeling tool is housed on the City’s new OrindaReady.com website and is pre-populated with more than 100 evacuation scenarios, including large scale evacuation efforts for North and South Orinda with new housing development for housing element site and current baseline amounts.

Staff also has the capability to run project specific scenarios, including for sites such as 23 Altarinda Road. It should be noted that these scenarios are not for the purposes of environmental analysis but are designed to help educate and inform the public about evacuation timing coupled with wildfire spread, a common concern in Orinda.

Item G.1
Packet Page 44
Comments Received from Public Agencies
An initial project referral form was sent out on August 6, 2025, with a request for comments no later than August 19, 2025, for a two-week comment period. That initial application included the General Plan and zoning changes, along with a proposed project.

Subsequently, applicant withdrew that initial request during the comment period and opted to resubmit with the proposed changes to the General Plan and zoning. A second project referral form was sent out on August 22, 2025, with a request for comments no later than Friday, September 5, 2025, for a two-week comment period (Attachment E). At the request of the Moraga-Orinda Fire District (MOFD), the comment period was extended to a week for a total of three weeks.

The agencies that responded to the current request included Caltrans, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Bay Area Regional Transit (BART) and Moraga-Orinda Fire District (MOFD).

Caltrans responded during the initial comment period and subsequently notified of the project change. Caltrans’ response to the subsequent notification of proposed changes to the General Plan and the zoning without a development project was to indicate that the same comments apply. Comments received recommended several highway operation studies, a travel demand analysis, and addressing potential construction related impacts.

EBMUD evaluated the initial proposed change to the General Plan, rezoning, and development project and provided comments. The agency was subsequently notified of the project change. EBMUD’s response to the subsequent notification of proposed changes to the General Plan and the zoning without a development project was to indicate that the same comments apply. Comments received recommended individual metering and potential off-site pipe improvements, coordination of water service and efficiency measures, and appropriate agreements and facilities to maintain water pressure.

PG&E evaluated the proposed change to the General Plan and rezoning. Comments received included a statement that PG&E will review submitted plans in relationship to their facilities in the project area. PG&E did provide standard project conditions related to gas facilities and electric facilities. In addition, the agency noted that there is a separate PG&E gas and electric service application process; a need to include the entire scope of a project, particularly for coordination with the CEQA; and the potential for an engineering deposit for review of plans. Finally, PG&E noted a potential filing if a proposed use is within a fee strip or easement.

BART evaluated the proposed change to the General Plan and zoning. Comments received included recognition of the site’s location within one-half mile within the Orinda BART station and a recommendation to zones at higher levels of intensity to take advantage of its proximity to high quality transit. BART noted that the 2017 Guidelines suggest allowing for 75 dwelling units per acre (mid-rise – 5 stories minimum). BART also recommended residential auto parking maximum at 1 space/unit, an office auto parking maximum as 2.5 space/2,000 square feet. The proposed changes to the General Plan and zoning would additionally allow mixed-use, multifamily residential development. The Item G.1
Packet Page 45
minimum residential density is 20 units per acre, and the maximum density is 25 units per acre.

MOFD evaluated the proposed change to the General Plan and zoning. Comments received included establishing a unique address, access road minimum width when buildings are 30 feet or greater, fire department access road length, vegetation design to meet fuel mitigation and defensible space requirements, hydrant requirements, and use of ignition resistant construction.

Any development project will have to address topics of recommended analysis as submitted by public agencies and comply with standard project conditions, but those project conditions are not known at this time.

Proposed General Plan Amendments
State law requires that a jurisdiction’s zoning districts be consistent with the General Plan land use categories. The 23 Altarinda Road site would be amended from the current General Plan classification of Business and Professional Offices to:

Downtown – General
The Downtown – General land use designation reflects the uses and development allowed within the Business and Professional Offices land use category, while additionally allowing mixed-use, multifamily residential development. The minimum residential density is 20 units per acre, and the maximum density is 25 units per acre.

Proposed Zoning Amendments
The 23 Altarinda Road site would be amended from the current zoning classification of DO (Downtown Office) to:

DG (Downtown General)
Downtown General is a zoning district that allows office uses and mixed-use multifamily residential development. Residential development in the DG district requires a minimum residential density of 20 units per acre and a maximum residential density of 25 units per acre.

Significantly, any parcel with a Downtown General zoning classification would be subject to all the same standards and regulations of the district from which it was rezoned while allowing the additional by-right use of multifamily residential development.

When development is proposed that includes a multifamily residential use, design and additional development standards for all proposed Downtown zoning districts would be governed by the Objective Design Standards for Multifamily Residential Housing in the Downtown General Zoning Districts (“Objective Design Standards”). These standards will streamline the development proposal review and entitlement process. The Objective Design Standards focus on form and massing, roof design, walls, windows, materials, colors, and specific building type.

Item G.1
Packet Page 46
If development is proposed that does not include multifamily residential as a component of the project, the project would be subject to the same regulations as would have been applied under the Downtown Office designation. Within the Downtown General (proposed zoning for 23 Altarinda Road) zone, any proposed projects would be subject to the use requirements, development regulations, and design review requirements for the Downtown Office District.

NEXT STEPS:

If the City Council introduces the Ordinance, Staff will prepare this for a second reading and adoption on February 17, 2026, along with the two resolutions – Resolution 01-26 and 02-26 for adoption.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Not applicable.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Proposed Ordinance 26-01 Amending the Zoning Map (PDF) B. Proposed Resolution 01-26 Amending the General Plan Map (PDF) C. Proposed Resolution 02-26 CEQA (Finding and Statement of Overriding Considerations) (PDF)
D. Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report (PDF)
E. Planning Commission Resolution 25-07 (PDF)
Respectfully Submitted by,
Lashun Cross, Planning Director
Approved By:

Linda Smith, City Manager
Item G.1
Packet Page 47

Page 1 of 4 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 26-01

A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION AT 23 ALTARINDA ROAD (APN 260-192-013) FROM “DO (DOWNTOWN OFFICE)” TO “DG (DOWNTOWN GENERAL)”
The City Council of the City of Orinda DOES ORDAIN as follows:

SECTION 1.

The City Council of the City of Orinda intends, by adopting this ordinance, to change the designation of the property at 23 Altarinda Road. These changes are intended to provide the opportunity for multifamily residential uses in the Downtown Village District to support downtown vitality and provide access to high quality transportation resources.

This ordinance amends the City’s Zoning Map to apply the new “DG (Downtown General)” zoning district to a site in the Downtown.

SECTION 2.

The Zoning Map is amended as shown in Attachment A to apply the “DG” zoning to 23 Altarinda Rd (APN 260-192-013).

SECTION 3.

SECTION 4.

This ordinance is consistent with the Orinda General Plan, including the relevant development densities described in the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element.

SECTION 5.

The City Council finds that this ordinance is necessary to support opportunity for additional multifamily residential uses in the downtown with access to high quality transportation resources and not subject to any requirement for additional review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). On March 18, 2025, the City Council adopted the Revised Final Environmental Impact Report (“RFEIR”) for Plan Orinda via Resolution No. 13-25. The zoning changes contained in this ordinance are within the scope of Plan Orinda RFEIR and were fully evaluated in the related environmental Item G.1
Packet Page 48

Page 2 of 4 ends

review documents (together, “Program EIR”) adopted for Plan Orinda. 14 Cal. Code Regs (“CCR”) §§ 15163, 15168. The Program EIR addresses all requirements of CEQA for this ordinance, including the analysis of significant impacts, cumulatively considerable contributions, and feasible mitigation measures of Plan Orinda. On March 18, 2025, the Council also adopted Resolution No. 13-25 containing CEQA findings and a statement of overriding considerations for the Orinda Housing Element based on substantial evidence. Id. § 15183.

The zoning amendment contained in this ordinance does not have any environmental effects not already fully examined in the Final EIR (id. § 15168) and the zoning amendment does not contain project-specific significant effects peculiar to the project or the site that were not fully analyzed in the Final EIR, including potentially significant off-site or cumulative impacts (id. § 15183). Consequently, the zoning amendment contained in this ordinance does not require any subsequent review or revisions to the Final EIR, as described in the CEQA Consistency Analysis prepared for the project and as detailed in the project staff report.

All feasible mitigation identified in the Program EIR has been incorporated in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) via Resolution No. 13-

25. These mitigation measures will apply to any development under Plan Orinda, including any development of sites consistent with the zoning changes contained in this ordinance. Id. §§ 15168, 15183. These mitigation measures will be undertaken as described in the MMRP.

SECTION 6.

This ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after adoption.

SECTION 7.

Following a duly-noticed public hearing, the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on February 3, 2026, and was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting held on February 17, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Item G.1
Packet Page 49

Page 3 of 4 ends

Brandyn Iverson, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
Attachment A: Zoning Map Exhibit: APN 260-192-013 Rezoned to DG Item G.1
Packet Page 50

Page 4 of 4 ends

Item G.1
Packet Page 51
RESOLUTION NO. 01-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA

AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN MAP TO CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM “BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES” TO “DOWNTOWN – GENERAL” FOR 23 ALTARINDA ROAD (APN 260-192-013) WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend the General Plan land use designation from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown - General”; and WHEREAS, state law requires consistency between the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City complied with all applicable procedural, notice, and tribal consultation requirements in state law; and
WHEREAS, with the approval of Resolution 13-25 on March 18, 2025, the City Council certified a Revised Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”) for Plan Orinda, which analyzed the impacts of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, Downtown Precise Plan (rescinded), Safety Element update, and implementing actions. Amending the General Plan land use designation for the 23 Altarinda site is within the scope of Plan Orinda, was fully evaluated in the Final EIR, and a CEQA consistency analysis was completed and described in the accompanying staff report; and WHEREAS, the Program EIR addresses all requirements of CEQA for the following ordinance, including the analysis of significant impacts, cumulatively considerable contributions, and feasible mitigation measures of Plan Orinda; and WHEREAS, with the approval of Resolution 13-25 on March 18, 2025, the City Council also adopted California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) that includes all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Program EIR; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Determination (NOD) was filed on March 20, 2025 with the Contra Costa County Clerk, in compliance CEQA, documenting that, with the approval of Resolution 13-25 on March 18, 2025, the City Council: (1) Certified the Plan Orinda RFEIR, which analyzed the impacts of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, Downtown Precise Plan (rescinded), Safety Element Update, and implementing actions, and concluded that the project would result in significant and unavoidable environmental effects; and (2) Adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and an MMRP based on the environmental impacts of the project as analyzed in the RFEIR; and
WHEREAS, on November 25, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Item G.1
Packet Page 52
Resolution 01-26
2 Resolution 25-07, recommended that the City Council (1) Adopt a Resolution affirming the consistency of the Proposed Project with the certified Final EIR for Plan Orinda, adopting the CEQA Findings, and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; (2) adopt a resolution amending the General Plan Map to change the land use designation from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown - General”; and (3) Adopt an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map change the zoning designation from “DO (Downtown Office)” to “DG (Downtown General)” for the property at 23 Altarinda Rd.; and
WHEREAS, on February 3, 2026, at a public hearing noticed consistent with state law, the City Council took testimony, discussed the issues, and considered all the written and oral evidence presented at the public hearing in making its decision.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orinda does hereby approve the attached amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, changing the designation for the property at 23 Altarinda Rd. from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown - General”.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orinda at a regular meeting on February 17, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA AFFIRMING THE CONSISTENCY OF THE 23 ALTARINDA ROAD PROJECT WITH PLAN ORINDA AND ITS CERTIFIED REVISED FINAL EIR; ADOPTING FINDINGS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); AND ADOPTING A

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THOSE IMPACTS THAT

WERE FOUND TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA DOES HEREBY FIND, ORDER, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals
The owner of the property at 23 Altarinda Rd. has applied for General Plan and Zoning amendments (“Project”) as envisioned for the site in Plan Orinda and as analyzed in the certified Revised Final EIR for Plan Orinda. The Project is within the scope of the Plan Orinda and was fully evaluated in the Revised Final EIR (“Final EIR”) certified for Plan Orinda. The Final EIR addresses all requirements of CEQA for the Project, including the analysis of significant impacts, cumulatively considerable contributions, and feasible mitigation measures of Plan Orinda. A detailed analysis to determine the Project’s consistency with Plan Orinda and its Final EIR was prepared and was included as an attachment to the City Council staff report.

On March 18, 2025, the City Council certified the Final EIR for Plan Orinda via Resolution No. 13-25. This resolution also contained CEQA findings and a statement of overriding considerations for the Orinda Housing Element based on substantial evidence. All feasible mitigation identified in the Final EIR has been incorporated in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) via Resolution No. 13-25. These mitigation measures will apply to any development approved based on the Final EIR, including the Project. All mitigation measures will be undertaken as described in the adopted MMRP.

On November 25, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 25-xx for the Project, recommending that the City Council (1) Adopt this resolution affirming the consistency of the Project with Plan Orinda and its certified Final EIR, adopting the CEQA Findings, and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; (2) Adopt a resolution amending the General Plan Map to change the land use designation from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown - General”; and (3) Adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation from “DO (Downtown Office)” to “DG (Downtown General)” for the property at 23 Altarinda Rd.

Section 2. Project’s Consistency with Plan Orinda and its Final EIR The City Council hereby finds as follows:

A. The Project’s Consistency Analysis with the Final EIR has been presented to the City Council (as an attachment to the City Council staff report). All procedures have been Item G.1
Packet Page 55
duly followed as required by law. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Consistency Analysis, Final EIR, and the record as a whole in conjunction with its deliberations, in accordance with CEQA, CEQA Guidelines, and procedures of the State of California and the City of Orinda. The Project’s Consistency Analysis with the Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.

B. The Project’s Consistency Analysis with the Final EIR demonstrated that the 23 Altarinda Rd. General Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment would be consistent with Plan Orinda. Specifically, the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, and geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure are as described in the Final EIR for Plan Orinda, and potential impacts associated with the Project are consistent with potential impacts characterized in and mitigation measures developed for the Final EIR. Based on this, the following determinations are applicable:
1 No further evaluation of environmental impacts is required; 2 No subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration is necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15162 and 15163; and
3 The Project’s Consistency Analysis with the Final EIR is the appropriate level of environmental analysis and documentation for the Project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15168(c).

C. The Final EIR provided substantial evidence that, for the following environmental subject areas, Plan Orinda, including the Project, would result in less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures: Aesthetics, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems.

D. The Final EIR concluded that Plan Orinda, including the Project, would result in significant and unavoidable adverse impacts in the following environmental subject areas: Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Transportation, and Wildfire.

E. The ,Final EIR also identified that Plan Orinda, including the Project, would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact regarding wildfires.

F. In compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the City Council has determined that findings regarding the significant impacts of the Project, which was analyzed as part of Plan Orinda, must be made and supported by substantial evidence in the record.

G. In compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has determined that a Statement of Overriding Item G.1
Packet Page 56
Considerations is required, as there are unmitigable environmental impacts that result from the Project, which was analyzed as part of Plan Orinda.

Section 3. Adoption of CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations The City Council hereby adopts the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached hereto as “Exhibit A-1” and incorporated herein by reference.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Orinda held on [February 17, 2026], by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
__________________________________
Brandyn Iverson, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Sheri Marie Smith, City Clerk
Exhibit A-1: 23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Item G.1
Packet Page 57
23 Altarinda Road General Plan
Amendment and Zoning Amendment
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations
prepared by
City of Orinda Planning Department
22 Orinda Way, 1st Floor
Orinda, California 94563
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street, Suite 303
Oakland, California 94612
January 2026
Item G.1
Packet Page 58
This page intentionally left blank.

Item G.1
Packet Page 59
CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations
for
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning
Amendment
Pursuant to CEQA Sections 15091 and 15093
and Public Resources Code Section 21081
The Revised Final Environmental Impact Report (Revised Final EIR) prepared by the City of Orinda (City) for Plan Orinda consisted of the Draft EIR (2022) as revised by the Partially Revised EIR (2024), the Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (2023), an Addendum dated March 21, 2023, the Response to Comments on the Partially Revised EIR (2025), and the Errata (2025). The Revised Final EIR identified significant environmental impacts that would result from implementation of Plan Orinda, which includes the Downtown Precise Plan (“DPP”), 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update, and the Safety Element Update. The City found that the inclusion of certain mitigation measures would reduce all but the following significant impacts to levels that are less than significant: hazards and hazardous materials, noise, transportation, and wildfire. No feasible mitigation measures have been identified to reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level or mitigation measures have been identified but would not reduce impacts to a level of less than significant; these impacts would remain significant, unavoidable impacts of Plan Orinda.

The City certified the Revised Final EIR as adequate under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the entirety of Plan Orinda in March 2025. However, at this time, the City has not approved one component of Plan Orinda: the DPP. The City originally approved all of Plan Orinda in January 2023 in reliance on the original Final EIR for Plan Orinda. In February 2024, Contra Costa County Superior Court issued a writ of mandate (“Writ”) ordering the City to rescind its certification of the original Final EIR; approval of the DPP; CEQA Findings; and Statement of Overriding Considerations, pending revisions to the EIR. The Writ did not require the City to rescind its approval of the 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update or the Safety Element Update, and in March 2025, the City decided not to pursue any revisions to those two components of Plan Orinda. The City also made Revised CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the previously approved 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update and Safety Element Update in March 2025.

The City is now making CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the 23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment (“Project” or “23 Altarinda Road Project”). These CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are intended to comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and 15093 and Public Resources Code 21081.

The City, in adopting these CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, also incorporates the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) adopted in March 2025 for Plan Orinda. The City finds that the MMRP, which is incorporated by reference, meets the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the Project. Pursuant Item G.1
Packet Page 60
to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3), the City also finds that the Revised Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment as the lead agency for the Project.

Item G.1
Packet Page 61
Table of Contents
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations i Table of Contents
1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Statutory Requirements for Findings..................................................................................1

1.2 Procedural Findings.............................................................................................................1

1.3 Findings Required Under CEQA...........................................................................................4

1.4 Record of Proceedings........................................................................................................4

1.5 Findings...............................................................................................................................5 2 Plan Orinda and the Project............................................................................................................6

2.1 Project Objectives...............................................................................................................6

2.2 Plan Orinda Description ......................................................................................................6

2.3 Project.................................................................................................................................7 3 Topical Areas Determined to have Less than Significant or No Impacts........................................8 4 Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant .....................................................................................................................................13 5 Topical Areas Determined to have Significant and Unavoidable Impacts....................................32

5.1 Cumulative Impacts ..........................................................................................................40 6 Feasibility of Project Alternatives.................................................................................................41

6.1 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative................................................................................41

6.2 Alternative 2: DPP Plus BART Sites....................................................................................41

6.3 Alternative 3: No DPP .......................................................................................................41 7 Statement of Overriding Considerations......................................................................................43 Item G.1
Packet Page 62
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment ii
This page intentionally left blank.

Item G.1
Packet Page 63
Introduction
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 1 1 Introduction

1.1 Statutory Requirements for Findings
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 states that:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that will otherwise occur with implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with another agency.1 For those significant effects that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, the public agency is required to find that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.2 CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 states:
“If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a propos[ed] project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable.”

1.2 Procedural Findings
The City Council of the City of Orinda finds as follows:

Based on the nature and scope of Plan Orinda, State Clearinghouse No. 2022010392, the City Council of Orinda determined, based on substantial evidence, that Plan Orinda may have a significant effect on the environment and prepared an EIR. The Revised Final EIR, including the Draft EIR (2022) as revised by the Partially Revised EIR (2024), the Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (2023), an Addendum dated March 21, 2023, the Response to Comments on the Partially Revised EIR (2025), and the Errata (2025), was prepared, noticed, published, circulated, reviewed and 1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a), (b). 2 Public Ressources Code Section 21081(b).

Item G.1
Packet Page 64
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 2 completed in full compliance with the CEQA Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15000 et. Seq.), as follows:
 Notice of Preparation and Initial Study. After deciding that an EIR is required, the lead agency (the City) must file a Notice of Preparation soliciting input on the EIR scope to the State Clearinghouse, other concerned agencies, and parties previously requesting notice in writing (CEQA Guidelines Section 15082; Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21092.2). The NOP must be posted in the County Clerk’s office for 30 days. The NOP may be accompanied by an Initial Study that identifies the issue areas for which the project could create significant environmental impacts. The City prepared a NOP of the Draft EIR for a 51-day agency and public review period commencing January 4, 2022. The NOP was amended on January 15, 2022 and public comment closed on February 24, 2022.
 Draft EIR Prepared. The Draft EIR must contain a) table of contents or index; b) summary; c) project description; d) environmental setting; e) discussion of significant impacts (direct, indirect, cumulative, growth-inducing, and unavoidable impacts); f) a discussion of alternatives; g) mitigation measures; h) discussion of irreversible changes, and i) any identified areas of controversy. The City prepared a Draft EIR and circulated the draft for public review for a 46-day comment period that began on September 15, 2022 and ended on October 31, 2022. A corresponding Notice of Availability (NOA) was published to provide notification when the Draft EIR became available for public review.
 In compliance with the writ of mandate (“Writ”) issued by the Contra Costa Superior Court (“Court”) in Orindans for Safe Emergency Evacuation v. City of Orinda, the City revised portions of Section 4.14 of the Draft EIR (i.e., the wildfire impacts analysis). Although the revisions to Section 4.14 did not indicate any new significant impacts, more severe significant impacts, new mitigation, or infeasibility of previously identified mitigation, the City recirculated the revised Section 4.14 for public review and comment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, as required by the Writ.
 The Court did not find any inadequacies in the Draft EIR’s alternatives analysis. Nonetheless, the Writ required the City to revise Section 6 of the Draft EIR (i.e., the alternatives analysis). In compliance with this provision, the City also revised portions of Section 6. Although the new information added to the EIR by the revisions to Section 6 did not indicate any new significant impacts, more severe significant impacts, new mitigation, or infeasibility of previously identified mitigation, the City recirculated that analysis for public review and comment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, as required by the Writ.
 The Partially Revised EIR, which included revisions to Section 4.14 and Section 6 of the Draft EIR as required by the Writ issued by the Court, was made available for a 45-day public review period commencing October 23, 2024, and closing December 9, 2024. The Notice of Availability of the Partially Revised EIR was posted with the County Clerk, sent to the State Clearinghouse, mailed to local and state agencies and emailed to interested parties.  Notice of Completion. The lead agency must file a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse when it completes a Draft EIR and prepare an NOA. The lead agency must place the Notice of Completion in the County Clerk’s office for 30 days (PRC Section 21092) and send a copy of the notice of completion to anyone requesting it (CEQA Guidelines Section 15087).

Additionally, public notice of Draft EIR availability must be given through at least one of the following methods: a) publication in a newspaper of general circulation; b) physical signage posting on and off the project site; and c) direct mailing to owners and occupants of contiguous properties. The lead agency must solicit input from other agencies and the public and respond Item G.1
Packet Page 65
Introduction
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3 in writing to all comments received (PRC Sections 21104 and 21253). An NOC was prepared and submitted to the State Clearinghouse with the Draft EIR on September 15, 2022.  A second NOC was filed and the NOA was published for the Partially Revised EIR on October 23, 2024.
 Final EIR. A Final EIR must include a) the Draft EIR; b) copies of comments received during public review; c) list of persons and entities commenting; and d) responses to comments. The City prepared a Final EIR, which was published and submitted to the State Clearinghouse on February 1, 2023.
 The Revised Final EIR prepared by the City in March 2025 consists of the Draft EIR (2022) as revised by the Partially Revised EIR (2024), the Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (2023), an Addendum dated March 21, 2023, the Response to Comments on the Partially Revised EIR (2025), and an Errata (2025).
 Certification of Final EIR. Prior to making a decision on a proposed project, the lead agency must certify that a) the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; b) the Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the lead agency; and c) the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving a project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15090). The Final EIR was certified by the City Council on March 18, 2025.  Lead Agency Project Decision. The lead agency may a) disapprove the project because of its significant environmental effects; b) require changes to the project to reduce or avoid significant environmental effects; or c) approve the project despite its significant environmental effects, if the proper findings and statement of overriding considerations are adopted (CEQA Guidelines sections 15042 and 15043). The lead agency may also approve only a portion of the project analyzed in an EIR. See Sierra Club v. City of Orange (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 523, 533; Save the Capitol, Save the Trees v. Department of General Services (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 1237, 1250
 Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations. No public agency may approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified and which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency finds, based on substantial evidence, that a) the project has been changed to avoid or substantially reduce the magnitude of the impact; b) changes to the project are within another agency's jurisdiction and such changes have or should be adopted; or c) specific economic, social, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives infeasible (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091). If an agency approves a project with unavoidable significant environmental effects, it must prepare a written Statement of Overriding Considerations that sets forth the specific social, economic, or other reasons supporting the agency’s decision.

These CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations describe the reasons supporting the City’s decision to approve the Project. The CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are included in this document.  Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program. When the lead agency makes findings on significant effects identified in the EIR, it must adopt a reporting or monitoring program for mitigation measures adopted or made conditions of project approval to mitigate significant effects. The MMRP was adopted by the City Council in March 2025 and is also being incorporated by reference here.

Item G.1
Packet Page 66
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 4  Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report. This document evaluates and confirms the consistency of the Project with the certified Revised Final EIR (State Clearinghouse #2022010392) for Plan Orinda.

1.3 Findings Required Under CEQA
The City Council (the final decision-making body) of the City of Orinda (the CEQA Lead Agency) previously decided to approve the Housing Element and Safety Element components of Plan Orinda and made findings in support of its decision pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093, and Public Resources Code Section 21081. Pursuant to those provisions, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified, which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out, unless the public agency makes one or more findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale of each finding. The possible findings, which must be supported by substantial evidence in the record, are:
 Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.  Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.  Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Here, the City is pursuing potential land use and zoning amendments for 23 Altarinda Road that were evaluated as part of Plan Orinda. These CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations apply to that Project only. If the City proceeds to re-approving the DPP (with potential revisions) in the future, it will adopt separate CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Consideration at that time.

1.4 Record of Proceedings
For purposes of CEQA and these findings, the record before the City Council includes the following:
 The Draft EIR and all appendices to the Draft EIR
 The Addendum dated March 21, 2023
 The Partially Revised EIR
 The Final EIR and Revised Final EIR, including Errata, comments on the Draft EIR and Partially Revised EIR, responses to those comments and all appendices to the Final EIR and Revised Final EIR
 All notices required by CEQA
 All studies conducted for Plan Orinda and contained in, or referenced by, the Draft EIR, Partially Revised EIR, the Final EIR, and the Revised Final EIR
 The Section 15168 environmental consistency analysis dated October 2025 Item G.1
Packet Page 67
Introduction
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 5  All documentary and oral evidence received and reviewed at public hearings, study sessions, and workshops and all transcripts and minutes of those hearings related to Plan Orinda the Draft EIR and the Final EIR
 For documentary and informational purposes, these Findings and Statement of Overriding Conditions, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and other documentation relevant to planned growth in the area
 Any additional items not included above if otherwise required by law

1.5 Findings
The Revised Final EIR is incorporated into these findings in its entirety. Without limitation, this incorporation is intended to elaborate on the scope and nature of mitigation measures, the basis for determining the significance of impacts, the comparative analysis of alternatives, and the reasons for approving the Project in spite of the potential for associated significant and unavoidable adverse impacts.

For the purposes of these findings, the impact discussions include the relevant policies and actions, as well as the separate mitigation measures imposed to reduce the impacts where the policies did not result in a less than significant impact. In the findings that follow, impact numbers are provided.

The impact numbers correspond to sections of the Draft EIR (as revised by the Partially Revised Environmental Impact Report (PREIR)) that contain an expanded discussion of impacts. Please refer to the referenced impact sections of the EIR for more detail.

Item G.1
Packet Page 68
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 6 2 Plan Orinda and the Project

2.1 Project Objectives
Pursuant to CEQA Section 15124(b), the EIR project description must include “[a] statement of objectives sought by the proposed project… The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project.” Plan Orinda, which included the 23 Altarinda Road Project, was intended to achieve the following project objectives:

1. Meet the State required RHNA for 6th Cycle Housing Element planning period of 2023-2031;

2. Bring the General Plan into conformance with recently enacted State law;

3. Identify housing policies and programs that enable the development of additional units and the preservation of existing units, that reduce governmental constraints to building housing, and that affirmatively further fair housing across the board;

4. Identify housing sites with a collective capacity to meet the City’s RHNA, with buffer capacity; and,

5. Locate most housing sites in existing urban areas, near transit and commercial services.

Plan Orinda, which included the 23 Altarinda Road Project, was also intended to achieve the following project objectives:

1. To encourage a mix of uses including employment opportunities, housing, recreational and cultural uses;

2. To increase open spaces and community gathering places to foster greater connections with nature;

3. To maintain the village “small town” character of Downtown while encouraging development that is compatible with existing uses, the pedestrian environment, and streetscape;

4. To incorporate varying architectural building types with appropriate detailing; and,

5. To develop the area with complimentary uses consistent with the current scale and size of surrounding development.

2.2 Plan Orinda Description
Plan Orinda was a long-range planning effort designed to shape the future of development and economic growth in Orinda. Plan Orinda included updates to the Housing Element, the Land Use Element, and the Safety Element section of the Environmental Resources Chapter of the General Plan; minor updates to the Growth Management Element of the Growth Management Chapter; and the adoption of new development standards and objective design standards for the Downtown area. The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (Connect Orinda) was adopted separately in November 2019. Plan Orinda anticipated multiple General Plan and Zoning Amendments based on the proposed changes to policies, programs, and land use. As noted above, 23 Altarinda Road was identified in Plan Orinda for General Plan land use and zoning designation changes to allow multifamily residential development.

Item G.1
Packet Page 69
Plan Orinda and the Project
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 7

2.3 Project
The 23 Altarinda Road Project site is in the Downtown area within the City of Orinda, Contra Costa County, California. The approximately 0.73-acre site is currently developed with an office building and associated surface parking and is situated in an urbanized setting characterized by low-rise office and commercial buildings, surface parking lots, and mature landscape. The Project would consist of a General Plan Amendment and a Zoning Amendment to change the site’s General Plan and zoning designations to allow for multifamily residential uses at a density of up to 25 dwelling units per acre, as anticipated under Plan Orinda.

Item G.1
Packet Page 70
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 8 3 Topical Areas Determined to have Less
than Significant or No Impacts
The City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as discussed below, the Project would have no impacts or its impacts would be less than significant with respect to the following topical areas. The EIR concluded that these impacts would be less than significant for impacts of Plan Orinda, which included the Project plus additional development. As a result, the City finds that the Project’s impacts associated with the following topical areas would also be less than significant.

Aesthetics
Impact AES-1
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would occur in different areas of the City including along a scenic corridor (Moraga Way). However, new development would not block expansive views or substantially impede access to longer-range views of the landscape. Impacts would be less than significant.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact AQ-1
Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not conflict with the control measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) increase from Plan Orinda, including the Project, would be less than the estimated population increase. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact AQ-4
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not create objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people. Impacts would be less than significant.

Impact GHG-1
Future development under Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not directly or indirectly generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would have a significant effect on the environment.

GHG emissions from Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not exceed Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) 2031 interpolated thresholds. This impact would be less than significant.

Impact GHG-2
Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not conflict with GHG reduction goals and policies in the 2017 Scoping Plan, Plan Bay Area 2050, or the City’s General Plan. This impact would be less than significant.

Item G.1
Packet Page 71
Topical Areas Determined to have Less than Significant or No Impacts Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 9 Biological Resources
Impact BIO-5
Tree removal associated with development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could result in damage to or destruction of protected trees. However, compliance with existing City of Orinda regulations would ensure that impacts would be less than significant.

Impact BIO-6
Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. There would be no impact.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-3
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could result in damage to or destruction of human burials. However, compliance with existing regulations on human remains would ensure less than significant impacts.

Geology and Soils
Impacts GEO-1 – GEO-5
The project site would not be subject to rupture of a known earthquake fault. Therefore, there would be no impact on development facilitated by the Project.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could result in exposure of people or structures to a risk of loss, injury, or death from seismic events, including ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides. Compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) and Safety Element policies would reduce ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslide hazards. Impacts would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would include ground disturbance such as excavation and grading that would result in loose or exposed soil. Disturbed soil could be eroded by wind or during a storm event, which would result in the loss of topsoil. Adherence to permit requirements, city regulations, and Safety Element policies would ensure that this impact would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or could become unstable resulting in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Compliance with the CBC and Safety Element policies would reduce hazards resulting from expansive soils. Impacts would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would mostly occur on urban sites that would be served by existing sanitation infrastructure. Therefore, impacts related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be less than significant.

Item G.1
Packet Page 72
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 10 Hazards/Hazardous Materials and Wildfire
Impacts HAZ-1 – HAZ-5
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could involve the use, storage, disposal, or transportation of hazardous materials. Upset or accident conditions in the project site area could involve the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Required adherence to existing regulations, programs, and Orinda General Plan policies would ensure that impacts would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, may result in the release of potentially hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school. However, compliance with regional and federal regulations related to hazardous materials and compliance with the Safety Element policies would minimize the risk of releases and exposure to these materials. Impacts would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not be located on a site included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Compliance with applicable regulations relating to site remediation, if necessary, would minimize impacts from development on previously unknown contaminated sites, resulting in a less than significant impact.

The City is not located in an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impacts related to airports would occur.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Land Use/Planning and Population/Housing
Impacts LU-1 – LU-2
Implementation of the Project would continue orderly development in the City and would not physically divide an established community. Impacts would be less than significant.

The Project would not result in a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with Plan Bay Area 2050 or the Orinda General Plan. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Noise
Impact NOI-3
The project site is not within the noise contours for an airstrip or airport as depicted on the airport land use plan, and no impacts would occur from exposing residents or workers to excessive aircraft noise levels.

Population and Housing
Impacts POP-1- POP-2
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could ultimately accommodate an additional 6,672 new residents and 2,383 new housing units in the City. This would exceed Plan Bay Item G.1
Packet Page 73
Topical Areas Determined to have Less than Significant or No Impacts Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 11 Area 2040 population and housing forecasts but would be consistent with the City’s RHNA allocation. ABAG’s next plan update would incorporate the Housing Element Update. Growth resulting from Plan Orinda, including the Project, would therefore be anticipated and would not result in unplanned population growth. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The Project involves a site not currently in residential use and would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. Impacts would be less than significant.

Public Services and Recreation
Impacts PS-1-PS-5
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would increase the population in the City, which would increase demand for fire protection services. However, this increase would not require additional and/or expanded fire protection facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would increase the population in the City, which would increase demand for police protection services. However, this increase would not require additional and/or expanded police protection facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would increase the population in the planning area, which could result in the need for additional and/or expanded school facilities.

However, Government Code 65995 (b) would require funding for the provision or expansion of new school facilities to offset impacts from the project. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would increase the population in the City, which would increase demand for parks and recreation services. However, the City would not exceed its threshold of five acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Conformance with Orinda Municipal Code and General Plan policies and programs related to parks and recreation services would require maintenance of parkland for new residential development and payment of Quimby park in-lieu fees and park impact fees to ensure ongoing parkland maintenance to prevent deterioration. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would increase the population in the City, which would increase demand for the use of public facilities such as libraries, possibly resulting in the need for additional open hours and staffing and the expansion of the Orinda Library.

However, any future plans to expand the Orinda Library would be subject to environmental review under CEQA and given that the Orinda Library is on an infill site expansion is unlikely to result in significant impacts. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Transportation
Impact TRA-1
The Project would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

Item G.1
Packet Page 74
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 12 Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTIL-2 and UTIL-3
The Project would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

Wildfire
Impact WFR-1a
The Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This impact would be less than significant.

Item G.1
Packet Page 75
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 13 4 Topical Areas Determined to Have
Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated
to Less Than Significant
These topical areas contain impacts of the Project that are reduced to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), as to each impact, the City, based on the evidence in the record before it, finds that changes or alterations incorporated into the Project mitigate, avoid, or substantially lessen to a level of insignificance these environmental impacts. The basis for the finding for each impact is set forth below and in the EIR, which concluded that these impacts of Plan Orinda would be reduced to a less than significant level through the incorporation of mitigation measures. Plan Orinda included the Project. As a result, the City finds that the Project’s impacts associated with the following topical areas would also be reduced to a less than significant level through the incorporation of mitigation measures.

The City notes that some mitigation measures include references to the DPP. These measures were included in the Plan Orinda EIR, which analyzed the impacts of, and identified mitigation for, the entire Plan Orinda, including the DPP. Although the DPP is not being re-approved at this time, the City has not deleted those references in the mitigation measures for three reasons: (1) those references will have no effect unless or until the DPP is re-approved; (2) retaining those references will not have any adverse impacts; and (3) modifying the mitigation measures to exclude the references to the DPP could cause confusion for readers. Retaining these references to the DPP in these mitigation measures does not constitute approval of the DPP; the City is not at this time reapproving the DPP, as set forth above.

Aesthetics
Impact AES-2-AES-4
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not result in substantial damage to scenic resources in view of a scenic highway, visual character, or light and glare, with implementation of mitigation. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE AES-1 CITY OF ORINDA OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS The City, with the guidance of a qualified urban design firm, shall develop and adopt objective design standards for the Plan Orinda area similar to the City’s current Senior Housing Overlay standards prior to development of the Housing Element sites. Objective Design Standards shall include guidance including but not limited to structure design, massing, intensity, lighting, and landscaping. For the Housing Element sites, the Objective Design Standards shall require tree planting or other screening measures to ensure that the general aesthetic of Orinda’s roadways would not be substantially adversely affected by the project.

Completion of the selected measure or a combination of the selected measures must, to the extent feasible, include properties located within the Cummings Valley Area.

Item G.1
Packet Page 76
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 14 Finding
The objective design standards required by Mitigation Measure AES-1 will apply to any future development at the Project site. The City finds that, with incorporation of Mitigation Measure AES1, impacts related to scenic routes, the visual character of the plan area, and light and glare would be mitigated to a less than significant level because the standards would ensure future development is consistent with Orinda’s established design character, incorporates screening and landscaping to reduce visual bulk, and minimizes potential sources of glare through controlled lighting design.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Air Quality
Impact AQ-2
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would increase air pollutant emissions, which would affect local air quality. Operational impacts from emissions of criteria pollutants would be less than significant. Construction impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-1 INDIVIDUAL AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS For individual projects subject to CEQA that do not meet the BAAQMD construction and/or operational screening criteria under Table 4.2-3, individual air quality analysis shall be conducted to determine project significance. Where individual projects exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds detailed under Table 4.2-4, mitigation measures shall be incorporated to reduce emissions to below thresholds or to the furthest extent possible. Construction mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, incorporation of Tier 4 and/or alternative fueled equipment, use of onsite power sources instead of generators, and use of low/no-VOC content architectural coatings. Operational mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, increased incorporation of PV beyond regulatory requirements, increased incorporation of EV charging stations and/or infrastructure beyond regulatory requirements, incorporation of a development wide, ride-share system, or elimination of natural gas usage within residential developments. Individual project analysis and accompanying emission-reduction measures shall be approved by the City and/or BAAQMD prior to issuance of a permit to construct or permit to operate.

MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-2 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS MEASURES As part of the City’s development approval and building permit issuance process, the City shall require project applicants to comply with the current Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s basic control measures for reducing construction emissions of PM10 (Table 8-2, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for All Proposed Projects, of the May 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines), outlined below.

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times a 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.

Item G.1
Packet Page 77
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 15

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.

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. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California Airborne Toxics Control Measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacture’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper conditions prior to operation.

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.

BAAQMD’s number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Finding
The City finds that with incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2, which would require incorporation of BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures, temporary construction impacts and fugitive dust emissions would be reduced to a less than significant level because any subsequent development project would be required to comply with BAAQMD’s basic control measures for reducing construction emissions of PM10 . In addition, any project that exceeds BAAQMD significance thresholds would be required to incorporate measures to reduce the project’s emissions below those thresholds. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Impact AQ-3
Construction activities for individual projects lasting longer than two months or located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. The Project would not include new sources of TACs and operational impacts would be less than significant.

MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-3 CONSTRUCTION HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT For individual projects where construction activities would occur within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, would use diesel equipment for longer than two months and would not utilize Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment, a construction health risk assessment (HRA) shall be prepared. If an HRA is to be prepared, the HRA shall determine potential risk and compare the risk to the following BAAQMD thresholds:
 Non-compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan;  Increased cancer risk of > 10.0 in a million;
 Increased non-cancer risk of > 1.0 Hazard Index (Chronic or Acute); or  Ambient PM2.5 increase of > 0.3 µg/m3 annual average
If risk exceeds the thresholds, measures such as requiring the use of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment shall be incorporated to reduce the risk to appropriate levels.

Item G.1
Packet Page 78
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 16 Finding
The City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3, which would require a HRA and related mitigation for projects with construction timelines greater than two months and within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, would reduce potential risk exposure to nearby sensitive receptors to a less than significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1
Implementation of Plan Orinda, including the Project, may result in impacts to special status plant and animal species directly or through habitat modifications. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT For projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5 that would require grading or vegetation trimming or removal, the project applicant shall hire a qualified biologist to perform a preliminary biological resources screening, for the City’s review and approval, to determine whether the project has the potential to impact special status biological resources, inclusive of special status plants and animals, sensitive vegetation communities, jurisdictional waters (including creeks, drainages, streams, ponds, vernal pools, riparian areas and other wetlands), critical habitat, wildlife movement area, or biological resources protected under local or regional ordinances or an existing HCP or NCCP. If it is determined that the project has no potential to impact biological resources, no further action is required.

If the project would have the potential to impact biological resources, prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a project-specific biological analysis to document the existing biological resources within a project footprint plus a minimum buffer of 50 feet around the project footprint, as is feasible, and to determine the potential impacts to those resources, as approved by the City. The project-specific biological analysis shall evaluate the potential for impacts to all biological resources including, but not limited to special status species, nesting birds, wildlife movement, sensitive plant communities, critical habitats, and other resources judged to be sensitive by local, State, and/or federal agencies. If the project would have the potential to impact these resources, mitigation measures BIO-2 through BIO-9 shall be incorporated and recommendations developed to enhance wildlife movement (e.g., installation of wildlife friendly fencing), as applicable, to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Pending the results of the projectspecific biological analysis, City review, design alterations, further technical studies (e.g., protocol surveys) and consultations with the USFWS, NMFS, CDFW, and/or other local, State, and federal agencies may be required. Note that specific surveys described in the mitigation measures below may be completed as part of the project-specific biological analysis where suitable habitat is present.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-2 SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES
If the project-specific biological analysis, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, determines that there is potential for significant impacts to federally or State listed plants from project development, a qualified biologist shall complete surveys for special status plants prior Item G.1
Packet Page 79
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 17 to any vegetation removal, grubbing, or other construction activity (including staging and mobilization). The surveys shall be floristic in nature and shall be seasonally timed to coincide with the target species blooming season or identifiable period identified in the project-specific biological analysis. All special status plant species identified on site shall be mapped onto a site-specific aerial photograph or topographic map with the use of Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. Surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the most current protocols established by the CDFW, USFWS, and the local jurisdictions if said protocols exist. A report of the survey results shall be submitted to the City, and the CDFW and/or USFWS, as appropriate, for review and/or approval.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-3 SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND

MITIGATION
If federally and/or State listed or CRPR List 1B or 2 species are found during special status plant surveys (pursuant to Mitigation Measure BIO-2, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE3, HE-4, and HE- 5), and listed species would be directly impacted, or there would be a populationlevel impact to non-listed species, then the project shall be re-designed to avoid impacting those plant species, Listed plant species occurrences that are not within the immediate disturbance footprint but are located within 50 feet of disturbance limits shall have bright orange protective fencing installed at least 30 feet beyond their extent, or other distance as approved by a qualified biologist and approved by the City, to protect them from harm.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-4 MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN If federally and/or State listed plants or non-listed special status plant populations cannot be avoided, within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, and will be impacted by development under Plan Orinda, all impacts shall be mitigated by project applicant at a minimum ratio of 1:1 with the final ratio to be determined by the City (in coordination with CDFW and USFWS as and if applicable) for each species as a component of habitat restoration. A qualified biologist shall prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan and submit it to the City for review and approval. (Note: if a federally and/or State listed plant species will be impacted, the plan shall be submitted to the USFWS and/or CDFW for review, and federal and/or State take authorization may be required by these agencies). The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following components:
 Description of the project/impact site (i.e., location, responsible parties, areas to be impacted by habitat type)
 Goal(s) of the compensatory mitigation project [type(s) and area(s) of habitat to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved; specific functions and values of habitat type(s) to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved]
 Description of the proposed compensatory mitigation site (location and size, ownership status, existing functions and values)
 Implementation plan for the compensatory mitigation site (rationale for expecting implementation success, responsible parties, schedule, site preparation, planting plan)  Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including weed removal as appropriate (activities, responsible parties, schedule)
 Monitoring plan for the compensatory mitigation site, including no less than quarterly monitoring for the first year (performance standards, target functions and values, target acreages to be established, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved, annual monitoring reports) Item G.1
Packet Page 80
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 18  Success criteria based on the goals and measurable objectives; said criteria to be, at a minimum, at least 80 percent survival of container plants and 30 percent relative cover by vegetation type  An adaptive management program and remedial measures to address any shortcomings in meeting success criteria
 Notification of completion of compensatory mitigation and agency confirmation  Contingency measures (initiating procedures, alternative locations for contingency compensatory mitigation, funding mechanism)
MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-5 LISTED SPECIES HABITAT ASSESSMENTS AND PROTOCOL SURVEYS If the results of the project-specific biological analysis, for projects within Housing Element sites HE2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, determine that suitable habitat is present for any federally or State listed species, a qualified biologist shall complete protocol habitat assessments/surveys in accordance with CDFW and/or USFWS protocols prior to issuance of any construction permits. If through consultation with the CDFW and/or USFWS it is determined that protocol habitat assessments/surveys are not required, said consultation shall be documented prior to issuance of any construction permits. Each protocol has different survey and timing requirements. The project applicant shall be responsible for ensuring they understand the protocol requirements and shall hire a qualified biologist to conduct protocol surveys. A report of any habitat assessments or protocol surveys shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the start of construction.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-6 LISTED SPECIES AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION The following measures shall be applied to aquatic and/or terrestrial species as determined by the project-specific biological assessment, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5.
 Ground disturbance shall be limited to the minimum necessary to complete the project. The project limits of disturbance shall be flagged. Areas of special biological concern within or adjacent to the limits of disturbance shall have highly visible orange construction fencing installed between said area and the limits of disturbance.  All projects occurring within/adjacent to aquatic habitats (including riparian habitats and wetlands) shall be completed between June 1 and October 15, to avoid impacts to sensitive aquatic species.
 All projects occurring within or adjacent to sensitive habitats that may support federally and/or State listed species shall have a CDFW-, NMFS-, and/or USFWS-approved biologist present during all initial ground disturbing/vegetation clearing activities. Once initial ground disturbing/vegetation clearing activities have been completed, said biologist shall conduct daily pre-activity clearance surveys for listed species. Alternatively, and upon approval of the CDFW, NMFS, and/or USFWS, said biologist may conduct site inspections at a minimum of once per week to ensure all prescribed avoidance and minimization measures are fully implemented.  No listed species shall be captured and relocated without express permission from the CDFW, NMFS, and/or USFWS.
 If at any time during construction of the project an endangered/threatened species enters the construction site or otherwise may be impacted by the project, all project activities shall cease.

A CDFW-, NMFS-, and/or USFWS-approved biologist shall document the occurrence and consult with the CDFW, NMFS, and USFWS, as appropriate, to determine whether it was safe for project activities to resume.

Item G.1
Packet Page 81
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 19  For all projects occurring in areas where listed species may be present and are at risk of entering the project site during construction, exclusion fencing shall be placed along the project boundaries prior to start of construction (including staging and mobilization). The placement of the fence shall be at the discretion of the CDFW-, NMFS-, and/or USFWS-approved biologist.

This fence shall consist of solid silt fencing placed at a minimum of 3 feet above grade and 2 feet below grade and shall be attached to wooden stakes placed at intervals of not more than 5 feet.

The fence shall be inspected weekly and following rain events and high wind events and shall be maintained in good working condition until all construction activities are complete.  All vehicle maintenance/fueling/staging shall occur not less than 100 feet from any riparian habitat or water body. Suitable containment procedures shall be implemented to prevent spills.

A minimum of one spill kit shall be available at each work location near riparian habitat or water bodies.
 No equipment shall be permitted to enter wetted portions of any affected drainage channel.  If project activities could degrade water quality, water quality sampling shall be implemented to identify the pre-project baseline, and to monitor during construction for comparison to the baseline.
 If water is to be diverted around work sites, a diversion plan shall be submitted (depending upon the species that may be present) to the CDFW, RWQCB, NMFS, and/or USFWS for their review and approval prior to the start of any construction activities (including staging and mobilization). If pumps are used, all intakes shall be completely screened with wire mesh not larger than five millimeters to prevent animals from entering the pump system.  At the end of each workday, excavations shall be secured with cover or a ramp provided to prevent wildlife entrapment.
 All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar structures shall be inspected for animals prior to burying, capping, moving, or filling.
 The CDFW, NMFS-, and/or USFWS-approved biologist shall remove invasive aquatic species such as bullfrogs and crayfish from suitable aquatic habitat whenever observed and shall dispatch them in a humane manner and dispose of properly.
 Considering the potential for projects to impact federally and/or State listed species and their habitat, City shall contact the CDFW, NMFS, and/or USFWS to identify mitigation banks within the project service area during development under Plan Orinda. Upon implementation of development projects included in the General Plan Update, but on a project-by-project basis, if the results of the project-specific biological analysis determines that impacts to federally and/or State listed species habitat are expected, the applicant shall identify species-appropriate mitigation bank(s) servicing the region and purchase mitigation credits as feasible.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-7 NON-LISTED SPECIAL STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES AVOIDANCE AND

MINIMIZATION
The project-specific biological analysis, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, shall identify some or all of the following measures that will be required and applicable to the individual project:
 For non-listed special status terrestrial amphibians and reptiles, a qualified biologist shall complete coverboard surveys within three months of the start of construction. The coverboards shall be at least 4 feet by 4 feet and constructed of untreated plywood placed flat on the ground. The coverboards shall be checked by a qualified biologist once per week for each week Item G.1
Packet Page 82
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 20 after placement up until the start of vegetation removal. All non-listed special status and common animals found under the coverboards shall be captured and placed in five-gallon buckets for transportation to relocation sites. All relocation sites shall be reviewed by the qualified biologist and shall consist of suitable habitat. Relocation sites shall be as close to the capture site as possible but far enough away to ensure the animal(s) is not harmed by construction of the project. Relocation shall occur on the same day as capture. CNDDB Field Survey Forms shall be submitted to the CFDW for all special status animal species observed.  Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of existing buildings to determine if bats are present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season (November through March). The biologist shall have access to all structures and interior attics, as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night, maternity, etc.).
 If bats are roosting in the building during the daytime but are not part of an active maternity colony, then exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to get out but are designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed.
 A qualified biologist shall complete pre-construction clearance surveys within 14 days of the start of construction (including staging and mobilization). The surveys shall cover the entire disturbance footprint plus a minimum 200-foot buffer, if feasible, and shall identify all special status animal species that may occur on-site. All non-listed special status species shall be relocated from the site either through direct capture or through passive exclusion. A report of the pre-construction survey shall be submitted to the City for their review and approval prior to the start of construction.
 The project-specific biological analysis, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE4, and HE-5, shall identify some or all of the following measures that will be required and applicable to the individual project:
 For non-listed special status terrestrial amphibians and reptiles, a qualified biologist shall complete coverboard surveys within three months of the start of construction. The coverboards shall be at least 4 feet by 4 feet and constructed of untreated plywood placed flat on the ground. The coverboards shall be checked by a qualified biologist once per week for each week after placement up until the start of vegetation removal. All non-listed special status and common animals found under the coverboards shall be captured and placed in five-gallon buckets for transportation to relocation sites. All relocation sites shall be reviewed by the qualified biologist and shall consist of suitable habitat. Relocation sites shall be as close to the capture site as possible but far enough away to ensure the animal(s) is not harmed by construction of the project. Relocation shall occur on the same day as capture. CNDDB Field Survey Forms shall be submitted to the CFDW for all special status animal species observed.  Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of existing buildings to determine if bats are present. The survey shall be conducted during the non-breeding season (November through March). The biologist shall have access to all structures and interior attics, as needed. If a colony of bats is found roosting in any structure, further surveys shall be conducted sufficient to determine the species present and the type of roost (day, night, maternity, etc.).
 If bats are roosting in the building during the daytime but are not part of an active maternity colony, then exclusion measures must include one-way valves that allow bats to get out but are Item G.1
Packet Page 83
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 21 designed so that the bats may not re-enter the structure. Maternal bat colonies shall not be disturbed.
 A qualified biologist shall complete pre-construction clearance surveys within 14 days of the start of construction (including staging and mobilization). The surveys shall cover the entire disturbance footprint plus a minimum 200-foot buffer, if feasible, and shall identify all special status animal species that may occur on-site. All non-listed special status species shall be relocated from the site either through direct capture or through passive exclusion. A report of the pre-construction survey shall be submitted to the City for their review and approval prior to the start of construction.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-8 PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS FOR NESTING BIRDS FOR

CONSTRUCTION OCCURRING WITHIN NESTING SEASON
For development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the project, that requires the removal of trees or vegetation that may contain a nesting bird, construction activities shall occur outside of the nesting season wherever feasible (September 16 to January 31), and no mitigation activity will be required. If construction activities must occur during the nesting season (February 1 to September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys for nesting birds covered by the CFGC and MBTA no more than 14 days prior to vegetation removal. The surveys shall include the entire segment disturbance area plus a 200-foot buffer around the site. If active nests are located, all construction work shall be conducted outside a buffer zone from the nest to be determined by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be a minimum of 50 feet for non-raptor bird species and at least 150 feet for raptor species. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest. The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until the adults and young are no longer reliant on the nest site. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is completed, and young have fledged the nest prior to removal of the buffer. A report of these preconstruction nesting bird surveys shall be submitted to the City to document compliance within 30 days of its completion.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-9 WORKER ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS PROGRAM (WEAP) If potential impacts to special status species are identified in the project-specific biological analysis, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, prior to initiation of construction activities (including staging and mobilization), all personnel associated with project construction shall attend WEAP training, conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in recognizing special status resources that may occur in the project site. The specifics of the WEAP shall include identification of the sensitive species and habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and mitigation measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. A fact sheet conveying this information shall also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employers, and other personnel involved with construction of projects. All employees shall sign a form documenting provided by the trainer indicating they have attended the WEAP and understand the information presented to them. The form shall be submitted to the City to document compliance.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-10 INVASIVE WEED PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM For those projects where activity would occur within or adjacent to sensitive habitats, such as riparian habitat or sensitive vegetation communities, as determined by the project-specific Item G.1
Packet Page 84
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 22 biological analysis, for projects within Housing Element sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, prior to start of construction a qualified biologist shall develop an Invasive Weed Prevention and Management Program to prevent invasion of native habitat by non-native plant species. The Invasive Weed Prevention and Management Program shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. A list of target species shall be included, along with measures for early detection and eradication. All disturbed areas shall be hydroseeded with a mix of locally native species upon completion of work in those areas. In areas where construction is ongoing, hydroseeding shall occur where no construction activities have occurred within six weeks since ground disturbing activities ceased. If exotic species invade these areas prior to hydroseeding, weed removal shall occur in consultation with a qualified biologist and in accordance with the restoration plan. Landscape species shall not include noxious, invasive, and/or non-native plant species that are recognized on the Federal Noxious Weed List, California Noxious Weeds List, and/or California Invasive Plant Council Lists 1, 2, and 4.

Finding
The City finds that with incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-10, which impose requirements on any future development proposed for the Project site to avoid or reduce impacts, the Project’s biological impacts would be reduced to less than significant. While most of these measures only apply to Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would also apply to development of the Project site. Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would reduce the Project’s impacts by requiring pre-construction surveys for nesting birds. In addition, the Project site is currently developed with office space; there are no known or anticipated special status plant or animal species on site. Impacts to special status species would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Impact BIO-2
Implementation of Plan Orinda, including the Project, may result in impacts to riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, or designated critical habitat for Alameda whipsnake directly or through habitat modifications. Impacts would be significant but mitigable.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-11 SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY AND CRITICAL HABITAT AVOIDANCE If sensitive natural communities or critical habitat are identified at Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, or HE-5 through the Biological Resources Screening and Assessment required by Mitigation Measure BIO-1, they shall be avoided and the project shall be situated outside of critical habitats. A qualified biologist shall approve the installation of bright orange protective fencing at least 30 feet beyond the extent of the sensitive natural community during construction, or other distance the City, to protect them from harm.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-12 RESTORATION FOR IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES

AND CRITICAL HABITAT
Impacts to sensitive natural communities, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, (including riparian areas that may qualify as waters of the State and/or waters of the U.S. under the jurisdiction[s] of the CDFW, RWQCB, and/or USACE) and critical habitat shall be mitigated onsite or through the funding for the acquisition and in-perpetuity management of similar Item G.1
Packet Page 85
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 23 habitat. The project applicant shall fund and manage off-site mitigation areas through purchase of credits from an existing, approved mitigation bank or land and placed into a conservation easement or other covenant restricting development (e.g., deed restriction). On-site mitigation, off-site mitigation, or in lieu funding sufficient to acquire and manage lands, if such a program were to be developed, shall provide habitat at a minimum ratio of 1:1 for impacted lands, comparable to habitat to be impacted by individual project activity.
 Restoration and Monitoring. If sensitive natural communities cannot be avoided and will be impacted by the project, the project applicant shall implement a compensatory mitigation program in accordance with Mitigation Measure BIO-4 and any additional measures set forth by the regulatory agencies during the permitting process (USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW for sensitive natural communities and USFWS and/or NMFS for critical habitat). The project applicant shall fully restore all temporary impacts to sensitive natural communities to their natural condition.
 Sudden Oak Death. A qualified biologist shall inspect all nursery plants used in restoration for sudden oak death. Nursery plants selected for restoration shall be purchased from a nursery that is in compliance with annual inspections under 7 CFR 301.92, et seq. for sudden oak death.

Vegetation debris shall be disposed of properly and vehicles and equipment shall be free of soil and vegetation debris before entering natural habitats. Pruning tools shall be sanitized.

Finding
The City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-11 and BIO-12, which would reduce impacts to sensitive natural communities and critical habitat by requiring biological resources studies for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, or HE-5, and implementation of further requirements described above would avoid or reduce impacts on a project-by-project basis.

If there are resource impacts, mitigation would be required by permitting agencies, which would result in impacts to sensitive natural communities and critical habitat being mitigated to less than significant levels. In addition, the Project site is currently developed with office space; there are no known riparian habitats or sensitive natural communities on site. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Impact BIO-3
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could adversely impact state or federally protected wetlands during project construction and/or operation. Impacts would be significant but mitigable.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-13 JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION
If potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands are identified by the project-specific analysis, for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, a qualified biologist shall complete a jurisdictional delineation to determine the extent of the jurisdictions for CDFW, USACE, and/or RWQCB. This delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth by each agency. The result shall be a preliminary jurisdictional delineation report that shall be submitted to the City, USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW, as appropriate, for review and approval.

Jurisdictional areas shall be avoided. If jurisdictional areas are expected to be impacted, then the RWQCB would require a Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) permit and/or Section 401 Water Quality Certification (depending upon whether the feature falls under federal jurisdiction). If CDFW Item G.1
Packet Page 86
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 24 asserts its jurisdictional authority, then a Streambed Alteration Agreement pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the CFGC would also be required prior to construction within the areas of CDFW jurisdiction. If the USACE asserts its authority, then a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA would likely be required. Furthermore, a compensatory mitigation program shall be implemented in accordance with Mitigation Measure BIO-4 and the measures set forth by the aforementioned regulatory agencies during the permitting process. Compensatory mitigations for all permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. and waters of the state shall be completed at a ratio as required in applicable permits but shall not be less than a minimum ratio of 1:1. All temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. and waters of the State shall be fully restored to natural condition. The project applicant shall submit the report documenting restoration activities and monitoring to the City for review and approval.

MITIGATION MEASURE BIO-14 GENERAL AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION Potential jurisdictional features within any of the Housing Element Sites or DPP area identified in jurisdictional delineation reports shall be avoided. Projects that may impact jurisdictional features shall include a report detailing how all identified jurisdictional features will be avoided, including groundwater draw down. The project applicant shall submit this report to the City for review and approval prior to construction.
 Material/spoils generated from project activities shall be located away from jurisdictional areas or special-status habitat and protected from storm water run-off using temporary perimeter sediment barriers such as berms, silt fences, fiber rolls (non- monofilament), covers, sand/gravel bags, and straw bale barriers, as appropriate.
 Materials shall be stored on impervious surfaces or plastic ground covers to prevent any spills or leakage from contaminating the ground and generally at least 50 feet from the top of bank.  Any spillage of material will be stopped if it can be done safely. The contaminated area will be cleaned, and any contaminated materials properly disposed. For all spills, the project foreman or designated environmental representative will be notified.

Finding
The City finds that with incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-13 and BIO-14, which impose requirements on any future development proposed for the Project site to avoid or reduce impacts, the Project’s biological impacts would be reduced to less than significant. While Mitigation Measure BIO-13 only applies to Housing Element Sites HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, and HE-5, Mitigation Measure BIO-14 would also apply to development of the Project site. Mitigation Measure BIO-14 would reduce the Project’s impacts by requiring general avoidance and minimization measures if potential jurisdictional features are present on the Project site. However, the Project site is currently developed with office space; there are no known wetlands on site. Impacts to wetlands would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, Plan Orinda that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Impact BIO-4
Implementation of Plan Orinda, including the Project, may result in impacts to wildlife movement through habitat modifications. Impacts would be significant but mitigable.

Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-9 would be required.

Item G.1
Packet Page 87
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 25 Finding
The City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and, as applicable, Measures BIO-2 through BIO-9, would reduce impacts to wildlife movement by requiring biological resources studies for projects within Housing Element Sites HE-3, HE-4 and HE-5, and additional mitigation if resources would be impacted. While most of these measures only apply to Housing Element Sites, Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would also apply to development of the Project site. Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would reduce the Project’s impacts by requiring pre-construction surveys for nesting birds. Impacts to wildlife movement would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, may result in the alteration or demolition of historical resources. Potential impacts to historical resources would be less than significant with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE CUL-1 BUILT ENVIRONMENT HISTORICAL RESOURCES For a project that involves a building or structure over 45 years of age, the project applicant shall hire a qualified professional to conduct a survey and evaluation of the structure(s) to determine their eligibility for recognition under State, federal, or local historic resource designation criteria.

The evaluation shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historical architect meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation, Professional Qualification Standards (PQS) as defined in 36 CFR Part 61. All buildings and structures 45 years of age or older within the Plan Area shall be evaluated in their historic context and documented in a report meeting the State Office of Historic Preservation guidelines. All evaluated properties shall be documented on Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 Forms. The report shall be submitted to the City for review and concurrence prior to project approval.

MITIGATION MEASURE CUL-2 TREATMENT OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES If historical resources are identified through the survey and evaluation, efforts shall be made to ensure that the relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of the resource under the proposed project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties (Standards). A report identifying and specifying the treatment of character-defining features and construction activities shall be provided, demonstrating how the project complies with the Standards and avoids the substantial adverse change in the significance of the historical resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b). The report shall be prepared by an architectural historian or historical architect meeting the PQS as defined by 36 CF Part 61 and provided to the City for review and concurrence prior to project approval.

Finding
The City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 would reduce impacts on historical resources to a less-than-significant level by requiring evaluations for any proposed development on the Project site and the implementation of further requirements if historic resources are identified. Impacts to historical resources would be mitigated to less than significant Item G.1
Packet Page 88
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 26 levels. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Impact CUL-2
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would have the potential to impact archaeological resources. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE CUL-3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES STUDY PROGRAM The project applicant shall hire a qualified professional to investigate the potential to disturb archaeological resources on a project site. If preliminary research suggests that cultural resources may exist, a Phase I cultural resources study shall be performed by a qualified professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s PQS for archaeology (NPS 1983). A Phase I cultural resources study shall include a pedestrian survey of the project site and sufficient background research and, as necessary, field sampling to determine whether archaeological resources may be present. Archival research shall include a records search at the NWIC and a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and coordination with Native American tribes listed by the NAHC. The Phase I technical report documenting the study shall include recommendations to avoid or reduce impacts on archaeological resources (e.g., monitoring, extended Phase I, etc.). The City shall review and approve the Phase I technical report prior to implementation of recommendations. The project applicant shall implement the recommendations prior to issuance of building permits.

MITIGATION MEASURE CUL-4 UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES In the event that archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 60 feet of the find shall be halted and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archeology (NPS 1983) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the find is prehistoric, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the find. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility. If the discovery proves to be eligible for the CRHR and cannot be avoided by the modified project, additional work, such as data recovery excavation, may be warranted to mitigate any significant impacts to historical resources. The City shall review and approve any treatment plan or modified project as applicable.

Finding
The Project changes the General Plan land use designation and zoning designation for the Project site and does not propose any development. That said, if any development is proposed in the future under the Project’s land use designation and zoning designation, the City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-3 and CUL-4 would reduce impacts on archaeological resources by requiring archaeological resource studies and the implementation of other requirements if archaeological resources are encountered. Impacts would be less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Item G.1
Packet Page 89
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 27 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources
Impact GEO-6
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, has the potential to impact paleontological resources. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

MITIGATION MEASURE GEO-1 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM The City of Orinda shall require avoidance and/or mitigation for potential impacts to paleontological resources for any development that occurs within high or undetermined sensitivity geologic units (Section 4.5, Geology and Soils, Table 4.5-2), whether they are mapped at the surface or occur in the subsurface. When paleontological resources are uncovered during site excavation, grading, or construction activities, work on the site will be suspended until the significance of the fossils can be determined by a qualified paleontologist. If significant resources are determined to exist, the paleontologist shall make recommendations for protection or recovery of the resource.

The City shall require the following for projects that could disturb geologic units with high paleontological sensitivity:
 Paleontological Resources Assessment (PRA). Prior to initial ground disturbance, the project applicant shall retain a Qualified Paleontologist to conduct a paleontological resources assessment (PRA). A qualified professional paleontologist is defined by the SVP (2010) standards as an individual preferably with an M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is experienced with paleontological procedures and techniques, who is knowledgeable in the geology of California, and who has worked as a paleontological mitigation project supervisor for at least two years. The PRA shall determine the age and paleontological sensitivity of geologic formations underlying the proposed disturbance area, consistent with SVP (2010) guidelines for categorizing paleontological sensitivity of geologic units within a project area. If underlying formations are found to have a high potential for paleontological resources, the Qualified Paleontologist shall create a Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program, which will be approved by the City of Orinda and contain the following elements:
 Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). Prior to the start of construction, the Qualified Paleontologist or their designee shall conduct a paleontological WEAP training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff.  Paleontological Monitoring. Full-time paleontological monitoring shall be conducted during ground disturbing construction activities (i.e., grading, trenching, foundation work) previously undisturbed sediments assigned a high paleontological sensitivity (Pleistocene alluvial fan and fluvial deposits, Mulholland Formation, Orinda Formation, Neroly Sandstone, Briones Sandstone, and Hambre Sandstone). Initial part-time monitoring (i.e., spot-checking) shall be conducted for all ground-disturbing activities that impact previously undisturbed Holocene units (i.e., Holocene alluvial fan and fluvial deposits) to check for the presence of older, higher sensitivity geologic units. If older sediments are observed at depth, then full-time monitoring shall be conducted. Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor, who is defined as an individual who has experience with collection and salvage of paleontological resources and meets the minimum standards of the SVP (2010) for a Paleontological Resources Monitor. The duration and timing of the monitoring will be determined by the Qualified Paleontologist based on the observation of the geologic setting from initial ground disturbance, and subject to the review and approval by the City of Orinda. If Item G.1
Packet Page 90
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 28 the Qualified Paleontologist determines that full-time monitoring is no longer warranted, based on the specific geologic conditions once the full depth of excavations has been reached, they may recommend that monitoring be reduced to periodic spot-checking or ceased entirely.

Monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required, and reduction or suspension shall be reconsidered by the Qualified Paleontologist at that time. In the event of a fossil discovery by the paleontological monitor or construction personnel, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease. A Qualified Paleontologist shall evaluate the find before restarting construction activity in the area. If it is determined that the fossil(s) is (are) scientifically significant, the Qualified Paleontologist shall complete the following conditions to mitigate impacts to significant fossil resources:
 Fossil Salvage. If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to halt or temporarily divert construction equipment within 50 feet of the find until the monitor and/or lead paleontologist evaluate the discovery and determine if the fossil may be considered significant. Typically, fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontologist and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases, larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. Bulk matrix sampling may be necessary to recover small invertebrates or microvertebrates from within paleontologically sensitive deposits
 Fossil Preparation and Curation. Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection, along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps.
 Final Paleontological Mitigation Report. Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) the Qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a final report describing the results of the paleontological monitoring efforts associated with the project. The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. The report shall be submitted to the City of Orinda. If the monitoring efforts produced fossils, then a copy of the report shall also be submitted to the designated museum repository.

Finding
The Project changes the General Plan land use designation and zoning designation for the Project site and does not propose any development. If any development is proposed in the future under the Project’s land use designation and zoning designation, the City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce impacts on paleontological resources by requiring avoidance of high sensitivity geological units and a course of action if paleontological resources are uncovered during construction. Impacts to paleontological resources would be mitigated to less than significant levels.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Item G.1
Packet Page 91
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 29 Transportation
Impact TRA-3
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, may result in designs for on-site circulation, access, and parking areas that fail to meet industry standard design guidelines.

However, with project-specific transportation impact analysis guidelines implemented as mitigation, impacts would be less than significant.

MITIGATION MEASURE TRA-2 PREPARE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS (TA) GUIDELINES The City shall prepare TA guidelines to identify if a project will have a substantial adverse effect on on-site and/or off-site vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation and access to transit. At a minimum, the guidelines shall include appropriate references to design guidelines and standards such as Caltrans Highway Design Manual and NACTO guidelines. The TA guidelines shall include transportation operations and queueing analysis to ensure a project will not create potential adverse effects on driveways and the internal and external roadway network.

Finding
The City finds that with incorporation of Mitigation Measure TRA-2, impacts on on-site circulation, access and parking areas would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Mitigation would require a transportation analysis based on the City’s new guidelines to be completed for each development project proposed on the Project site prior to the permitting process. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, Plan Orinda that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Impact TRA-4
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not result in inadequate emergency access during operation of new or existing development. Construction could adversely affect emergency access; however, impacts related to construction would be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE TRA-3 CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC GUIDELINES Prior to issuance of building permits for sites that accommodate development facilitated by Plan Orinda, the City shall adopt guidance prepared by a qualified transportation consultant for accommodating pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit in construction zones. This shall include providing sidewalk diversion or detour plans, bicycle accommodations, and bus stop relocation or closure plans.

Finding
The City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measure TRA-3, which would ensure that pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders would be accommodated in construction zones for any future development proposed on the Project site to avoid obstruction of emergency access, impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Item G.1
Packet Page 92
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 30 Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TCR-1
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, may involve grading and/or excavation, which have the potential to impact previously unidentified tribal cultural resources.

Impacts on tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation.

MITIGATION MEASURE TCR-1 AVOIDANCE OF TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES When feasible, development facilitated by the project shall be designed to avoid known tribal cultural resources. Any tribal cultural resource within 60 feet of planned construction activities shall be fenced off to ensure avoidance. The feasibility of avoidance of tribal cultural resources shall be determined by the City and applicant in consultation with local California Native American tribe(s).

MITIGATION MEASURE TCR-2 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCE PLAN
A Tribal Cultural Resources Plan shall be required for development occurring in areas identified as potentially sensitive for tribal cultural resources during consultation with local California Native American tribe(s) during AB 52 consultation if required for the project. Prior to any development facilitated by the project that would include ground disturbance, the project applicant or its consultant, shall prepare a tribal cultural resources treatment plan to be implemented in the event an unanticipated archaeological resource that may be considered a tribal cultural resource is identified during construction. The plan shall include any necessary monitoring requirements, suspension of all earth-disturbing work in the vicinity of the find, avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the local Native Americans and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate treatment for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City and the appropriate local California Native American tribe(s) to confirm compliance with this measure prior to construction.

MITIGATION MEASURE TCR-3 NATIVE AMERICAN MONITORING
For development occurring in areas identified as potentially sensitive for tribal cultural resources through consultation with local California Native American tribe(s), the project applicant shall retain a locally affiliated Native American monitor to observe all ground disturbance, including archaeological excavation, associated with development facilitated by the project. Monitoring methods and requirements shall be outlined in a tribal cultural resources treatment plan prepared under Mitigation Measure TCR-2. In the event of a discovery of tribal cultural resources, the steps identified in the tribal cultural resources plan prepared under Mitigation Measure TCR-2 shall be implemented.

Finding
The City finds that incorporation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 through TCR-3 would reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural resources from development facilitated by the Project to less than significant levels by requiring avoidance, treatment plans, and monitoring in areas identified as sensitive for tribal cultural resources. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or Item G.1
Packet Page 93
Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 31 alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Utilities
Impact UTIL-1
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, may require the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities within the city. Mitigation measures identified throughout the EIR, including mitigation measures related to biological resources, cultural resources, and geology and soils, would be implemented to minimize impacts related to grounddisturbing activities associated with potential infrastructure construction.

Finding
The City finds that with incorporation of Mitigation Measures identified throughout the EIR, impacts would be less than significant, as discussed throughout Section 4, Topical Areas Determined to Have Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to Less Than Significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible.

Item G.1
Packet Page 94
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 32 5 Topical Areas Determined to have
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-6
Implementation of Plan Orinda, including the Project, could expose people or structures to a significant risk from wildland fires because the plan area includes sites in or near moderate, high, and very high FHSZs. Wildfire risks could be significant.

Mitigation Measures WFR-1 through WFR-14 would be required (see Wildfire below).

FINDING
The Project would allow new, higher density residential and mixed use development at the Project site, which is located within a Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). The City finds that, with incorporation of Mitigation Measures WFR-1 through WFR-14, the risk of loss of structures and the risk of injury or death due to wildfires would be reduced by ensuring coordination with federal, state, and local agencies for emergency response and evacuation; providing guidance for implementation of new evacuation and safety programs; requiring minimization of site wildfire hazards through preparation of project-specific fire protection plans and maintenance of defensible space; pursuing funding for roadway and other improvements; and enforcing state and local fire regulations. However, it is possible that mitigation measures would not fully prevent a significant risk of wildfires or fully protect people and structures from the risks of wildfires in all cases. Thus, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. No additional mitigation measures to reduce this impact to less than significant levels are feasible. This impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Noise
Impact NOI-1
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would introduce new on-site operational noise sources associated with residential and mixed use development and would contribute to increases in traffic noise. The continued regulation of on-site noise under the Orinda Municipal Code would minimize disturbance to adjacent land uses, and traffic noise increases would not exceed significance thresholds; therefore, operational noise impacts would be less than significant. Construction of individual projects facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would temporarily increase noise levels, potentially affecting nearby noise-sensitive land uses.

Provisions in the Orinda Municipal Code would limit construction noise disturbance to the extent feasible. However, construction noise may still exceed noise standards and impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

MITIGATION MEASURE NOI-1 CONSTRUCTION NOISE REDUCTION MEASURES For development projects involving construction within 50 feet of sensitive receivers, the applicant shall develop a site specific Construction Noise Reduction Program prepared by a qualified Item G.1
Packet Page 95
Topical Areas Determined to have Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 33 acoustical consultant to reduce construction noise impacts to the maximum extent feasible, subject to review and approval of the Planning Director and in advance of issuance of building permits. The following measures to minimize exposure to construction noise shall be included:

1. Mufflers. During excavation and grading construction phases, all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards.

2. Air compressors. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources to the greatest extent practicable. Select hydraulically or electrically powered equipment and avoid pneumatically powered equipment where feasible.

3. Pile driving. If pile driving is required, pre-drill foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile. Examine whether the use of sonic pile driving is feasible and quieter. If so, utilize that method.

4. Stationary Equipment. All stationary construction equipment shall be placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest sensitive receivers. Construct temporary noise barriers or partial enclosures to acoustically shield such equipment to the maximum extent feasible.

5. Equipment Staging Areas. Equipment staging shall be located in areas that will create the greatest distance feasible between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers.

6. Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels.

Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction.

7. Perimeter Noise Reduction. Construct solid plywood fences around construction sites adjacent to operational business, residences or other noise-sensitive land uses where the noise control plan analysis determines that a barrier would be effective at reducing noise.

8. Signage. For the duration of construction, the applicant or contractor shall post a sign in a construction zone that includes contact information for any individual who desires to file a noise complaint.

Finding
The City finds that implementation of Orinda Municipal Code requirements and Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise from development projects facilitated by the Project.

However, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would not ensure that construction noise impacts would be reduced to below Federal Transit Administration (FTA) construction noise limits or would not result in a substantial increase over ambient noise levels. Therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

Impact NOI-2
Operation of residential and mixed uses facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not result in substantial vibration or ground-borne noise. However, construction facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, could temporarily generate ground-borne vibration during construction, particularly through pile driving, potentially affecting nearby land uses. Mitigation measures could not ensure that impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Therefore, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Item G.1
Packet Page 96
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 34 MITIGATION MEASURE NOI-2 VIBRATION CONTROL PLAN
For projects involving pile drivers, the applicant shall prepare a Vibration Control Plan prior to the commencement of construction activities. The Vibration Control Plan shall be prepared by a licensed structural engineer and shall include methods to minimize vibration, including, but not limited to:
 Use of drilled piles or similar method (e.g., cast-in-place systems) rather than pile driving  Use of resonance-free vibratory pile drivers
 Avoiding the use of vibrating equipment when allowed by best engineering practices The Vibration Control Plan shall include a pre-construction survey letter establishing baseline conditions of buildings within a 50-foot radius as well as at potentially affected extremely fragile buildings/historical resources and/or residential structures within the vicinity of the construction site. The condition of existing potentially affected properties shall be documented by photos and description of existing condition of building facades, noting existing cracks. The survey letter shall provide a shoring design to protect such buildings and structures from potential damage. At the conclusion of vibration causing activities, the qualified structural engineer hired by the applicant shall issue a follow-up letter describing damage, if any, to impacted buildings. The letter shall include recommendations for repair, as may be necessary, in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Repairs shall be undertaken and completed by the contractor and monitored by a qualified structural engineer in conformance with all applicable codes including the California Historical Building Code (Part 8 of Title 24).

A Statement of Compliance signed by the applicant and owner is required to be submitted to the City Building Department at plan check and prior to the issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan, prepared as outlined above, shall be documented by a qualified structural engineer, and shall be provided to the City upon request. A Preservation Director shall be designated and this person’s contact information shall be posted in a location near the project site so that it is clearly visible to the nearby receivers most likely to be disturbed. The Director will manage complaints and concerns resulting from activities that cause vibrations. The severity of the vibration concern should be assessed by the Director, and if necessary, evaluated by a qualified noise and vibration control consultant.

Finding
The City finds that impacts associated with vibration from pile driving would be reduced to the greatest extent feasible, including avoidance of damaging an historic or cultural resources, through implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2. Still, impacts related to vibration may remain above distinctly perceptible levels even with implementation of a vibration control plan and would be significant and unavoidable.

Transportation
Impact TRA-2
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would generate home-based VMT per capita that would be less than 85 percent of the countywide average home-based VMT per resident.

However, it is possible that development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not be screened out of further project-specific VMT analysis and may exceed the VMT criteria. Even with mitigation, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Item G.1
Packet Page 97
Topical Areas Determined to have Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 35 MITIGATION MEASURE TRA-1 IMPLEMENT VMT REDUCTION MEASURES Individual housing project development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis using the methods applied in this EIR, with modifications if appropriate, based on future changes to City of Orinda practices and CCTA VMT analysis methodology guidelines. The City shall require travel demand management measures and physical measures to reduce VMT for projects that result in a significant impact. These shall include, but not be limited to, the measures below, which have been identified as being potentially VMT reducing in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (December 2021). Potential VMT reduction estimates are included below, but detailed requirements, calculation steps, and limitations are described in the CAPCOA Handbook.

In addition, application of one or more measures shall be generally expected to result in a net VMT reduction of 10 percent or less for development projects in suburban settings such as Orinda. • Unbundle parking costs (i.e., sell or lease parking separately from the housing unit).

Effectiveness: up to 15.7 percent reduction in GHG from VMT per the CAPCOA Handbook. • Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, or scooter sharing programs. Effectiveness: 0.15 – 0.18 percent reduction in GHG from VMT for car share, 0.02 – 0.06 percent for bike share, and

0.07 percent for scooter share, pursuant to the CAPCOA Handbook. The higher car share and bike share values are for electric car and bike share programs. • Subsidize transit passes for residents of affordable housing. Effectiveness: up to 5.5 percent reduction in GHG from VMT pursuant to the CAPCOA Handbook.

In addition to the on-site measures noted above, individual housing projects that are above the VMT threshold could potentially contribute to future VMT mitigation fee programs, banks, or exchanges.

No regional VMT mitigation programs currently exist; however, the CCTA is currently evaluating different mitigation program frameworks which may lead to a countywide or sub-regional VMT mitigation program. Should such a program be implemented, development projects could potentially pay into a fee program or purchase mitigation credits to achieve needed VMT mitigation instead of, or in addition to, on-site TDM measures.

Finding
The City finds that with incorporation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, impacts to VMT would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible by unbundling parking, providing car sharing, and subsidizing transit passes. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect the extent feasible. However, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Wildfire
Impact WFR-1b
Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would be in and near a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) or Very High FHSZ. By adding additional residents to already constrained evacuation routes, Plan Orinda, including the Project, would substantially increase evacuation constraints. This conclusion is supported by the additional evacuation constraint analysis performed Item G.1
Packet Page 98
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 36 by PlaceWorks and attached as Attachment 1 to the Response to Comments document in the Revised Final EIR. While implementation of Safety Element policies and Mitigation WFR-1 and WFR4 through WFR-14 would help reduce this impact, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-1 DEVELOP WILDFIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT AND PLAN AND SITES

SUBJECT TO SHELTER-IN-PLACE GUIDELINES
The City shall require the following measures prior to approval of projects on any new development at the Housing Element Sites or in the DPP:

1. A Wildfire Hazard Assessment and Plan shall be developed for the project site.

2. Shelter-in-place design guidelines shall be required for project site development. Guidelines include the following:
 Well-maintained, fire district approved landscape and vegetation management plan  Adequate roadway and driveway widths, designed to accommodate two-way traffic and large firefighting apparatus
 Adequate water supply and water flow for firefighting efforts  Vegetation modification zones surrounding the community  Homes in the community are built with heavy timber; ignition-resistant eaves; residential fire sprinklers; a Class A, ignition-resistant roof; dual pane (one being tempered) glass windows; and chimneys with spark arrestors containing a minimum of 0.5-inch screen

3. Hazard Assessment and Plan and site design applying shelter-in-place guidelines must be approved by MOFD.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-4 TRANSPARENCY AND TRACKING FOR WILDFIRE EVACUATION

IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
The City shall publish a spreadsheet listing: wildfire evacuation mitigation measures that have been adopted, Safety Element policies regarding wildfire evacuation, and the recommendations related to wildfire evacuation contained in the Evacuation Analysis and/or Supplemental Evacuation Analysis. This spreadsheet shall indicate the department(s) and individual(s) responsible for implementing each, any relevant deadlines for implementation, status of implementation, any known impediments to implementation (e.g., lack of funding), and proposed next steps. This spreadsheet shall be updated and made available on the City’s website.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-5 REGULAR SSTOC UPDATES ON WILDFIRE EVACUATION IMPROVEMENT

MEASURES
For the duration of the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle, the City’s Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission3 (SSTOC) shall receive regular updates from City staff, including the City Manager, City Engineer, and the Education and Outreach Coordinator, on the City’s progress with regard to the items included in the spreadsheet described in WFR-4. City staff shall also provide the SSTOC with information and analysis regarding projects that are or may be included in the City’s 3 The SSTOC was established by the City Council of the City of Orinda by resolution on December 15, 2020. The full Resolution is provided here: https://www.cityoforinda.org/DocumentCenter/View/4762/SSTOC-Bylaws?bidId= Item G.1
Packet Page 99
Topical Areas Determined to have Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 37 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to improve wildfire evacuation. The CIP shall include information regarding the relative importance and priority of such projects.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-6 PURSUIT OF GRANT FUNDING FOR PEDESTRIAN, BIKE, AND

EMERGENCY VEHICULAR IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN MORAGA AND ORINDA BART The City shall continue to pursue grant funding for a pedestrian and bike connection from Moraga to Orinda BART that could also be used for emergency vehicular access in the event of a wildfire or other emergency.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-7 PURSUIT OF GRANT FUNDING FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE

IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN DOWNTOWN ORINDA AND WILDER
The City shall continue to pursue grant funding for a pedestrian and bike connection from Wilder to Downtown Orinda along SR-24 that could potentially be used in the event of a wildfire or other emergency.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-8 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL UPDATES ON WILDFIRE EVACUATION

IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
At least annually for the duration of the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle, City staff shall provide the City Council with an update at a public meeting on the City’s progress with regard to the items included in the spreadsheet described in WFR-4.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-9 PURSUIT OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES TO IMPROVE WILDFIRE

EVACUATION
During the next update to the Lamorinda Fee and Finance Authority’s mitigation fee program, which is expected to commence in 2025 with an updated nexus study, City staff shall work with fellow member municipalities Lafayette and Moraga to pursue collection of appropriate development impact fees to help fund potential transportation system improvements to address the impact of potential new development on emergency evacuation.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-10 COORDINATION WITH MOFD
For the duration of the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle, the City Manager and/or their designee(s) shall continue to meet with MOFD staff at least two times a year to coordinate emergency evacuation issues. Items for future discussion would include the following:

1. Possible use of EVA routes by the public for evacuation

2. Possible improvements to EVA routes, including the EVAs connecting Brookside Road with Boeger Ranch Road, Edgewood Road with Wilder Road, and El Toyonal with Wildcat Canyon Road and potential funding sources

3. Any concerns MOFD may have regarding emergency vehicle use of City roadways MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-11 ENHANCED CITY STAFFING FOR ISSUES RELATED TO WILDFIRE For the duration of the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle, the City shall maintain the equivalent of a full-time staff person whose primary responsibility is to work with key stakeholders inside and outside of the City (including but not limited to residents, businesses, Moraga-Orinda Fire District, Orinda Police Department, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, City of Lafayette, Town of Moraga, Contra Costa Office of Emergency Services, East Bay Municipal Utility District, East Bay Item G.1
Packet Page 100
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 38 Regional Park District) on wildfire-related risk reduction, wildfire evacuation planning, disaster preparedness training, evacuation capacity expansion/maintenance, and emergency response capability.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-12 ENHANCED CITY EVACUATION PLANNING AND EDUCATION At least annually for the duration of the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle, the City Manager or their designee shall review and update as needed the City’s plans for emergency evacuation, including public education regarding resources the public should use in case of emergency to determine when, where, and how to evacuate.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-13 UPDATE TO CITY WILDFIRE EVACUATION PLAN By February 1, 2026, the City shall prepare a Wildfire Evacuation Plan to update and expand the 2018 Annex included with the City’s Emergency Operations Plan.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-14 USE OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGY TO STUDY EVACUATION The City will explore and employ as appropriate state-of-the-art options, technologies, and approaches prior to undertaking the next Safety Element update mandated by the state. With significant advancements currently being made in the fields of data collection, analysis, artificial intelligence (AI) and geographic information system (GIS) technologies, more robust and reliable evacuation modeling tools are expected to become available soon. Although some of these tools are already becoming available, there are reliability concerns due to the rapid advancement of technology in this field in a very short time.

Finding
The City finds that with implementation of Mitigation Measure WFR-1 and WFR-4 through WFR-14, congestion induced from additional residents at 23 Altarinda Road during an evacuation may be reduced, since more new housing would be built in a way that would allow residents to shelter in place rather than evacuate during a fire. Additionally, development of a project-specific Wildfire Hazard Assessment and Plan would help identify wildfire hazards of a given site and provide additional risk minimization measures. However, Mitigation Measure WFR-1 would not ensure that residents actually shelter in place during a fire, nor is sheltering in place always advisable. Further implementation of the Safety Element Update policies, including the measures recommended in the Environmental Assessment (EA)/Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), and Mitigation Measures WFR-4 through WFR-14 would also reduce evacuation constraints by ensuring coordination with federal, state, and local agencies for emergency response and evacuation; providing guidance for implementation of new evacuation and safety programs; requiring minimization of site wildfire hazards through preparation of project-specific fire protection plans and maintenance of defensible space; pursuing funding for roadway and other improvements; and enforcing state and local fire regulations. However, many of the Safety Element Update policies and Mitigation Measures WFR-4 through WFR-14 depend on cooperation of other agencies or substantial funding, which the City does not currently have and cannot guarantee. Those measures that are within the City’s control and budget—including WFR-4, -5, -8, -11, -12, and -13—involve improving transparency and information sharing with the City Council, commissions, and the public, and updating the City’s evacuation plans. These measures alone are insufficient to reduce the impacts of Plan Orinda, including the Project, to less than significant. As a result, it is not possible to ensure that Plan Orinda, including the Project, would not substantially increase evacuation Item G.1
Packet Page 101
Topical Areas Determined to have Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 39 constraints, despite implementation of mitigation and adopted policies. Even with the mitigation measures and Safety Element policies adopted by the City, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible. However, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Impact WFR-2
Plan Orinda, including the Project, envisions potential future development on sites that are in or near Moderate, High, and Very High FHSZs. Development facilitated by Plan Orinda, including the Project, would expose project occupants and structures to wildfire risks for sites located in or WUIs or Very High FHSZs. Wildfire risk would be significant and unavoidable.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-2 CONSTRUCTION WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION The City shall require the following measures during project construction:

1. Construction activities with potential to ignite wildfires shall be prohibited during red-flag warnings issued by the National Weather Service for the site. Example activities include welding and grinding outside of enclosed buildings.

2. Fire extinguishers shall be available onsite during project construction. Fire extinguishers shall be maintained to function according to manufacturer specifications. Construction personnel shall receive training on the proper methods of using a fire extinguisher.

3. Construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be equipped with spark arresters. The spark arresters shall be maintained pursuant to manufacturer recommendations to ensure adequate performance.

At the City’s discretion, additional wildfire risk reduction requirements may be required during construction. The City shall review and approve the project-specific methods to be employed prior to building permit approval.

MITIGATION MEASURE WFR-3 PROJECT DESIGN WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION Project landscape plans shall include fire-resistant vegetation native to Contra Costa County and/or the local microclimate of the site and prohibit the use of fire-prone species especially non-native, invasive species.

If the project site is within a known landslide area (see Figure 4.5-2 in Section 4.5, Geology and Soils), the site shall be subject to geotechnical review regarding potential post-fire slope instability.

Structural engineering features incorporated into the design of the structure to reduce the risk of damage to the structure from post-fire slope instability shall be recommended by a qualified engineer and approved by the City prior to the building permit approval.

Finding
The Project site is located within a Moderate FHSZ. The City finds that with implementation of Mitigation Measures WFR-2 and WFR-3, the risk of loss of structures and the risk of injury or death due to wildfires would be reduced. These measures would make structures in any future development proposed for the Project site more fire resistant and less vulnerable to loss in the event of a wildfire. These measures would also reduce the potential for construction to Item G.1
Packet Page 102
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 40 inadvertently ignite a wildfire. However, it is not possible to prevent a significant risk of wildfires or fully protect people and structures from the risks of wildfires, despite implementation of mitigation.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect to the extent feasible. However, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

5.1 Cumulative Impacts
The City finds that the Project, in conjunction with other foreseeable projects, would result in cumulatively considerable impacts.

With the exception of the unavoidable impacts to wildfire hazards, construction noise, construction vibration, VMT per capita, and development in the WUI and FHSZs, the Project would have no impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact after mitigation with respect to all environmental issues.

As discussed in Section 4.14 Wildfire of the EIR, much of Orinda is located in the Very High FHSZs and/or is designated as a WUI. Most of the unincorporated county is designated as an State Responsibility Area (SRA). Within the geographic scope for this cumulative analysis (all of Contra Costa County), wildfire-related impacts could be significant if development is in rural or high fire hazard areas that could exacerbate risks. Cumulative development throughout Contra Costa County would increase the density of development in urban areas and within designated urban service areas, which would increase the number of residents in designated WUI and FHSZs, potentially exacerbating wildfire risks or impairing adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. All new development and infrastructure would be subject to the policies and requirements outlined in local Safety Element and emergency plans (as described in Impact WFR-1a and WFR-1b), as well as statewide standards for fire safety in the California Fire Code, as described in Impact WFR-2. However, existing plans, codes, and regulations cannot fully prevent wildfires from damaging structures or populations, and cumulative wildfire impacts would be significant.

As described in Impact WFR-1b, Plan Orinda, including the Project, would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to emergency evacuation constraints. While mitigation and City actions are provided to reduce this impact, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable, as the residential development anticipated under the Project would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to residential development more generally in the region, and together this development would substantially increase evacuation constraints on the region’s already constrained evacuation routes. Therefore, the Project would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact related to evacuation.

As described in Impact WFR-2, of Plan Orinda, including the Project, would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to the exposure of people to wildfire risks. While mitigation is provided, it is not possible to prevent a significant risk of wildfires or fully protect people and structures from the risks of wildfires. Therefore, the Project would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact regarding wildfires.

Plan Orinda, including the Project would result in substantial long-term environmental impacts and, therefore, would contribute to cumulative environmental changes that may occur due to planned and pending development. Potential impacts of the Project would be cumulatively considerable.

Item G.1
Packet Page 103
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 41 6 Feasibility of Project Alternatives
CEQA requires that an EIR include an analysis of a reasonable range of feasible alternatives to a project capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant adverse environmental impact associated with the project. The discussion of alternatives is required to include the “No Project” alternative. The EIR’s discussion of alternatives can be found in Section 6 of the Draft EIR and PREIR and is summarized here. The EIR’s analysis of alternatives was challenged in litigation that is now resolved. No legal challenge was filed following the City’s March 18, 2025 certification of the Revised Final EIR.

6.1 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative assumed there is no change in zoning or General Plan land use designations for the parcels identified by Plan Orinda, including 23 Altarinda. Current uses on the sites, including the Project site, would continue under this alternative, with future full buildout of all sites limited by the existing zoning and General Plan designations. Buildout of the proposed Project site under existing zoning would result in no new residential development or additional population.

This alternative would not allow for additional residential development, including on the Project site at 23 Altarinda, and therefore would not promote downtown revitalization or provide housing opportunities downtown in proximity to transit, services, and amenities. Because this alternative would not allow increased housing development, it also would not accomplish any of the four Housing Element Update project objectives.

6.2 Alternative 2: DPP Plus BART Sites
Alternative 2 analyzed one of the identified Housing Element sites on Moraga Way (HE-4, Miramonte High School site) along with two parking lots owned by Caltrans adjacent to the Orinda Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station (BART-A and BART-B). This alternative included all of the “DPP sites” identified for future housing as outlined in Tables 2-4 and 2-5 in Section 2, Project Description of the EIR. This alternative did not include Housing Element Sites HE-1, HE-2, HE-3, and HE-5.

This alternative would have resulted in approximately 2,941 new dwelling units and approximately 8,233 new residents. This would equate to approximately 558 more units and approximately 1,561 more new residents than Plan Orinda. This pattern of development would have reduced VMT as it was assumed that many of the future residents would use BART for some travel and that most residents would live closer to Downtown, which would provide local retail, commercial uses, and services. Alternative 2 would have met or exceeded all of the Housing Element Update objectives and objectives relating to downtown revitalization and provided housing opportunities downtown in proximity to transit, services, and amenities.

6.3 Alternative 3: No DPP
Alternative 3 analyzed all of the identified Housing Element Sites (HE-1 through HE-5) along with the two BART sites (BART-A and BART-B). Although the number of dwelling units would have increased under this alternative compared to Plan Orinda as proposed, Alternative 3 would have excluded all Item G.1
Packet Page 104
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 42 of the “DPP sites” identified for future housing, including the site at 23 Altarinda, and thus would have involved development on fewer sites throughout the City.

This alternative would have resulted in approximately 1,854 new dwelling units and approximately 5,190 new residents. This would have equated to approximately 529 fewer units and approximately 1,482 fewer residents than Plan Orinda. This alternative would have been consistent with most of the project objectives for the Housing Element Update but not the objectives relating to downtown revitalization and providing housing opportunities downtown in proximity to transit, services, and amenities; development facilitated under this alternative would have met the State required RHNA for 6th Cycle Housing Element planning period of 2023-2031, identifying housing sites with a collective capacity to meet the City’s RHNA, with buffer capacity, and locating most housing sites in existing urban areas, near transit and commercial services.

Finding
CEQA provides that a public agency may not approve a project with significant, unavoidable environmental impacts unless it makes certain findings, including the finding that “[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.” (Pub. Resources Code Section 21081; see also CEQA Guidelines Section 15091.) When the City certified the Revised Final EIR on March 18, 2025, it adopted detailed findings to support the conclusion that the alternatives listed above are infeasible. See Resolution No. 13-25.

That conclusion was not challenged. It remains valid and relevant to the City’s findings for the Project as set forth in this document. Specifically, the overriding social, economic and other considerations (set forth in this Statement of Overriding Considerations) provide support for the Project and the elimination of these alternatives from further consideration.

Item G.1
Packet Page 105
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 43 7 Statement of Overriding Considerations
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance the benefits of a project against its significant unavoidable impacts. If the benefits of the project outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a)). CEQA requires the agency to state, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b)). Plan Orinda, including the Project, could result in significant unavoidable impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, transportation, noise, and wildfire even after incorporation of feasible mitigation measures. These significant unavoidable impacts are identified and discussed in Section 5 of these Findings.

Pursuant to the Writ issued by the Court, the City was required to rescind its certification of the original Plan Orinda FEIR, revise the EIR in part, certify the revised EIR, and adopt revised CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of its 2023 approval of the Housing Element and Safety Element update components of Plan Orinda. The City has satisfied all the requirements of the Writ and the litigation is now fully resolved. No legal challenge was filed following the City’s March 18, 2025 certification of the Revised Final EIR.

The Writ allowed, but did not require, the City to re-approve the DPP component of Plan Orinda.

The City is not reapproving the DPP at this time. This Statement of Overriding Considerations relates only to 23 Altarinda Road Project and refers only to the benefits of the Project that outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR. If the City approves the DPP component of Plan Orinda (with or without revisions) in the future, the City will likewise comply with CEQA’s requirements regarding CEQA findings and override findings at that time.

The City finds that each of the benefits set forth below in this Statement constitute a separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the 23 Altarinda Road Project outweigh the risks of potential significant adverse environmental impacts. The benefits of the 23 Altarinda Road Project are as follows:
 The Project will enable the development of multi-family housing units, which tend to be a smaller, more affordable housing type than single family residential. The City currently has very little multi-family housing, but it is a type of housing for which there is a great deal of unmet demand in Orinda. The Housing Element notes that 95.3% of Orinda’s housing stock in 2021 was single family homes, while only 4.5% were multi-family units. The City has received input from many residents who would like to “downsize” from their single family homes while staying in the community. Similarly, the City has received input that for younger households seeking to enter the expensive Orinda housing market, multifamily units could be a viable option, if more were available. The City can help make this possible by allowing development of more multifamily housing as proposed by the Project. A variety of housing types at different affordability levels will diversify the City’s housing stock, which is desired by the community and will contribute toward alleviating a shortage of housing in Orinda and the region. These conclusions are supported by the extensive public outreach process the City undertook in developing Plan Orinda, including the hosting of a series of community workshops, online forums, stakeholder interviews, and Planning Commission/City Council study sessions.

Item G.1
Packet Page 106
City of Orinda
23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment 44  The Project will encourage the development of housing with access to transit, jobs, services, and community benefits and will enable residents to live in closer proximity to many community amenities. Unlike much of Orinda, the Project site is within walking distance, or a short bike ride, of the BART station, a grocery store, the downtown, and city parks. Development of housing in proximity to such amenities supports the City’s active transportation goals, including as referenced in the City’s ConnectOrinda Plan and the Bike, Trails and Walkways Master Plan.  Approving the Project will help demonstrate that the City is “open for business” and welcomes appropriate redevelopment of its Downtown, which includes a number of vacant and underutilized properties and has long suffered from a lack of private investment/development.

According to the findings of the Urban Land Institute’s 2017 Downtown Orinda Technical Assistance Panel, building height limits and low density requirements in downtown have made some forms of development economically challenging. Other contributing factors include longtime property owners that are not incentivized to intensify or redevelop their properties with new or different uses.
 The Project will contribute to local tax revenues. In the 2025-2026 tax year, the assessed value for property tax purposes was approximately $1.1 Million. That number would be much higher following redevelopment with the Project as the value of 15+ new residential units would be substantially higher than the current value of the approximately 4,600 square foot commercial building. Even at a conservative average valuation of $500,000 per unit, redevelopment of the site would result in a new property valuation of $7.5 million.  The Project will contribute to local job creation and economic vitality, especially during construction.
 The Project would allow residential development on a site that is currently designated in the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code for commercial land uses (primarily office), not housing.

Under recent changes to State law (e.g., SB 6/Government Code Section 65852.24), however, the applicant could potentially assert the right to develop housing on the site even if the City were to decline to amend its land use designation. In light of such changes to State law, the City no longer has the authority to outright prohibit residential development on the site for a project that meets the requirements of State law (e.g., SB 6/Government Code Section 65852.24). The Project allows the City to address potential residential development on the site on its own terms. This is important because it allows the City to retain maximum local land use authority and avoid the imposition of a State mandate.
 Through numerous legislative actions in the past several years, the State of California has identified the lack of housing as a significant area of public concern, leading to an unsustainable lack of housing affordability, increased homelessness, social stress related to increased poverty and a reduction in economic prosperity for many state residents. In the current 6th housing element cycle, Orinda has been allocated 1,359 units between 2023 and 2031. The Project will help the City of Orinda meet its State-mandated obligation to promote the development of housing in the community and comply with State Housing Element Law. While 23 Altarinda is not a Housing Element site, 15 or more new units developed on that 0.73-acre site will count towards meeting the City’s RHNA numbers during the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle and will be reported during the City’s Annual Progress Report to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”). This is particularly important because if the City does not meet its regional housing needs allocation (“RHNA”) it will be subject to increasingly onerous State law streamlining requirements (see e.g., SB 35). Orinda has already been determined by the State/HCD to have made insufficient progress toward its lower income RHNA (Very Low and Low income) and is therefore subject to the streamlined ministerial SB 35 approval process for Item G.1
Packet Page 107
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 45 proposed developments with at least 50% affordability. If the City is also determined to have made insufficient progress toward its above moderate income RHNA, it will be subject to mandatory SB 35 streamlining for developments with at least 10% affordability. The State/HCD is scheduled to make such a determination at the midpoint of the 6th housing element cycle (i.e., January 2027). The Project is expected to help the City make timely progress towards its RHNA, which would help the City avoid increasingly onerous streamlining requirements under SB 35.  In response to concerns and suggestions raised in public comments, the MMRP includes wildfire evacuation mitigation measures, including additional commitments of City staff time and resources to pursue funding, coordinate with other agencies, and inform the public of actions taken to improve evacuation conditions. These measures will provide safety benefits to Orindans in the event a wildfire evacuation is necessary. While these mitigation measures will not reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance, they will provide benefits regardless of how much new development is facilitated by the Project. Development facilitated by Plan Orinda would be required to undertake mitigation measures included in the MMRP.  Plan Orinda includes a state-mandated Safety Element Update that establishes a framework that anticipates hazards and prepares the community to minimize exposure to these risks, including those related to wildfire and emergency evacuation. Any development of the Project site would be required to be consistent with the Safety Element.

On balance, the City finds that each of the benefits associated with the Project set forth above, independent of the other benefits, constitutes an Overriding Consideration that overrides and outweighs the significant unavoidable effects identified in the EIR. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b), these adverse effects are considered acceptable.

As the Court noted in its Minute Order, override findings are not required to provide a comparative analysis of “how the Project’s benefits are deemed to outweigh its environmental downside.” (Minute Order Page 30). The Court reasoned: "The Project’s benefits (e.g., providing more housing for California residents and complying with state housing mandates) are apples; the Project’s environmental downsides (adverse effect on wildfire risk and evacuation) are oranges. There is no math or science that allows an EIR’s analysis to quantify how one does or doesn’t outweigh the other. That weighing of the plus-side apples against the minus-side oranges is a policy decision, the decision that the policy makers are to decide – not that an EIR can or should dictate to them.” (Minute Order Page 30). Thus, these override findings set forth the benefits of the Project and find that these benefits outweigh the environmental impacts identified in the Revised Final EIR.

Item G.1
Packet Page 108
23 Altarinda Road General Plan
Amendment and Zoning Amendment
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report
SCH #2022010392
prepared by
City of Orinda
Planning Department
22 Orinda Way, 1st Floor
Orinda, California 94563
Contact: Lashun C. Cross, Director of Planning
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants
66 Franklin Street, Suite 300
Oakland, California 94607
November 2025
Item G.1
Packet Page 109
Item G.1
Packet Page 110
Table of Contents
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report i Table of Contents
1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background .........................................................................................................................1 2 Project Location and Description....................................................................................................4 3 Environmental Impact Analysis ....................................................................................................10

3.1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15162........................................................................................10

3.2 CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(2) ...............................................................................11 4 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................14 5 References and Preparers.............................................................................................................15

5.1 Documents Incorporated by Reference............................................................................15 Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location................................................................................................................5 Figure 2 Project Site Location ...........................................................................................................6 Figure 3 Project Site, Existing Conditions..........................................................................................7 Item G.1
Packet Page 111
ii
This page intentionally left blank.

Item G.1
Packet Page 112
Introduction
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 1 1 Introduction
This document evaluates and confirms the consistency of the proposed 23 Altarinda Road General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment (“Proposed Project”) with the certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) (State Clearinghouse [SCH] # 2022010392) for Plan Orinda.

The Proposed Project was evaluated in the Final EIR, which is available for public review at:

City of Orinda Planning Department
22 Orinda Way, 1st Floor
Orinda, California 94563
The Final EIR is hereby incorporated into this document by reference and available at:
https://www.planorinda.com/library
Section 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, codified in Sections 15000 et seq. of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, discusses the use of a Program EIR for environmental review of all related activities within a program analyzed in the EIR. A lead agency may approve the subsequent activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the EIR; in that instance, no new environmental document would be required. As discussed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c), “Factors that an agency may consider in making that determination include, but are not limited to, consistency of the later activity with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure, as described in the program EIR.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) also refers to Section 15162 for this determination. Section 15162 asks whether there is “[n]ew information of substantial importance” that the project would “have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration [or that] significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR.” The analysis herein demonstrates that the General Plan and Zoning amendments proposed for 23 Altarinda Road were part of Plan Orinda as analyzed in the Final EIR; there is no new information suggesting that the Proposed Project would have new or increased significant effects. The Proposed Project may therefore be approved pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15168(c) and 15162 without preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR.

1.1 Background
The Revised Final EIR for Plan Orinda (SCH #2022010392) was certified by the Orinda City Council on March 18, 2025, along with a Revised Statement of Overriding Considerations and Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

The Final EIR evaluated future development across multiple sites within the City of Orinda, including at 23 Altarinda Road. Specifically, Plan Orinda, as evaluated in the Final EIR, included rezoning of numerous properties to allow for more housing development based on proposed updates to the Housing Element, General Plan Land Use Element, and the Downtown Precise Plan (DPP). For example, Plan Orinda anticipated new zoning and objective design standards for the downtown area, which includes 23 Altarinda Road. In total, Plan Orinda envisioned development of up to 2,383 new residential units across 48 Housing Element sites, including five sites outside the downtown area and 43 sites within the downtown. These downtown sites would accommodate a mix of Item G.1
Packet Page 113
2 residential, commercial, and office uses, with building heights ranging from 27 to 55 feet depending on location. Plan Orinda would also support future infrastructure upgrades, including stormwater drainage, utilities, and transportation improvements.

To date, the City has approved many, but not all, components of Plan Orinda as evaluated in the Final EIR:
 Plan Orinda components approved to date: The Housing Element and Safety Element update components of Plan Orinda were approved on January 31, 2023. To comply with a court order, on March 18, 2025, the City Council considered whether to pursue revisions to those Housing Element or Safety Element updates. The Council opted not to do so. As a result, those components of Plan Orinda remain in place as originally approved on January 31, 2023. On October 21, 2025, the City Council approved various General Plan and Zoning changes throughout the City to implement the certified Housing Element. Because 23 Altarinda Road is not one of the Housing Element opportunity sites its General Plan and Zoning designations were not updated as part of the Council’s October 21, 2025 action.  Other Plan Orinda components not yet approved: The proposed General Plan and Zoning designation changes for the parcel at 23 Altarinda Road were included as part of Plan Orinda and fully evaluated in the Final EIR. The proposed General Plan and Zoning designation changes for the parcel at 23 Altarinda Road have not yet been approved because the City has, to date, only completed the General Plan and Zoning amendments necessary for its Housing Element opportunity sites. The property at 23 Altarinda Road was not relied on by the City as an opportunity site in its Housing Element. Potential housing development at downtown sites including 23 Altarinda Road was, however, fully analyzed in the Final EIR under the umbrella of the City’s Downtown Precise Plan (DPP), a high-level policy document that envisioned housing development throughout the downtown. The DPP is not yet in effect. It was originally approved by the City Council on January 31, 2023, but later rescinded due to litigation. On March 18, 2025, the Council opted to pursue potential revisions prior to any readoption of the DPP. To date, the Council has not considered such potential revisions or re-adopted the DPP. The General Plan and Zoning amendments proposed by the applicant for 23 Altarinda Road are proceeding independent of any future City reconsideration of its DPP. The proposed General Plan and Zoning designation changes proposed for the parcel at 23 Altarinda Road are separate from and do not depend on any potential readoption of the City’s DPP.

Project Site
The City of Orinda is located in western Contra Costa County in the San Francisco Bay Area. Orinda is situated in a semi-rural, urbanized setting bordered by the City of Lafayette to the east, the Town of Moraga to the southeast, and unincorporated Contra Costa County to the north and west. The downtown area is wholly within the municipal boundary, is located near the geographic center of Orinda, and is bisected by State Route (SR) 24 and the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rapid transit line that includes an Orinda BART station. The downtown area includes the Theatre and Village Districts, which are characterized by low-rise commercial and office buildings, surface parking lots, and pedestrian-oriented streetscapes. Surrounding the downtown area are residential neighborhoods and open space areas.

Proposed Project Relation to Plan Orinda and the Plan Orinda Final EIR The Proposed Project consists of amending General Plan land use and zoning designations (as well as consequent revisions to maps of land use and zoning designations) for one parcel in the Item G.1
Packet Page 114
Introduction
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 3 downtown, at 23 Altarinda Road. The Proposed Project would amend the site’s General Plan designation: currently Business Professional Office and zoning designation: currently Downtown Office, to also allow for multifamily residential uses. The new General Plan designation and new zoning designation would allow a density of up to 25 dwelling units per acre, as anticipated under the Final EIR. The Final EIR programmatically studied the impacts of this proposed General Plan and zoning designations change for the parcel at 23 Altarinda Road, along with many other proposed changes. Specifically, 23 Altarinda Road was included in the geographic scope of the Final EIR and was analyzed for its potential to accommodate multifamily residential development consistent with the Plan Orinda’s goals for housing and land use diversification. Under the Final EIR, the site was studied with the assumption that it could support residential densities of up to 25 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the General Plan and zoning amendments adopted by the Orinda City Council on November 3, 2025.

Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, and geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts in the Final EIR.

Item G.1
Packet Page 115
4 2 Project Location and Description
The project site is located at 23 Altarinda Road within the City of Orinda, Contra Costa County, California. The approximately 0.73-acre1 site is on the west side of Altarinda Road just south of its intersection with Village Gate Road. The site is currently developed with an office building and associated surface parking and is situated in a generally developed setting characterized by low-rise office and commercial buildings, sloping topography, surface parking lots, and mature landscaping.

The Final EIR identifies the project site as Site-DPP-23, with a current land use designation of Business Professional Office and a current zoning of Downtown Office. Land uses surrounding the project site include educational, commercial, religious, residential, recreational, and office uses.

Access to the project site is provided by Altarinda Road. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the project site within the region and Figure 2 shows the project site within a neighborhood context.

Figure 3 provides photographs of existing conditions on the project site.

The Proposed Project would consist of a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan land use designation from “Business and Professional Offices” to “Downtown – General” and a Zoning Map Amendment to change the Zoning District from “DO (Downtown Office)” to “DG (Downtown General)”. The new General Plan land use designation and new Zoning designation would continue to allow office uses but also expand the allowed land uses of 23 Altarinda Road to include multifamily residential uses at a minimum density of 20 units per acre and a maximum density of 25 units per acre, as anticipated under the Final EIR. The proposed zoning includes the City’s adopted objective design standards for the downtown area. The Proposed Project would thus be consistent with the development potential assumed in the Final EIR. The City of Orinda has received various iterations of conceptual plans for future development at the project site; however, these have been withdrawn by the project applicant. Because the plans have been withdrawn, no specific project or physical development is currently proposed. At this time, the applicant is only requesting City approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and a Zoning Amendment. In the absence of proposed plans, the City cannot speculate regarding what specific project the applicant might ultimately propose at the site. However, Section 3 of this document, Environmental Impact Analysis, describes the analysis already completed in the Final EIR to address potential future development applications, including potential reliance on State Density Bonus law. 1 County records indicate the project site to be approximately .60 acre, which was reflected in the Final EIR and associated documentation; however, recent surveys approximated the project site as .73 acre.

Item G.1
Packet Page 116
Project Location and Description
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 5 Figure 1 Regional Location
Item G.1
Packet Page 117
6 Figure 2 Project Site Location
Item G.1
Packet Page 118
Project Location and Description
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 7 Figure 3 Project Site, Existing Conditions
Photograph 1. View of the project site, looking east, showing the existing office building, parking lot, and landscaping.

Photograph 2. View of the project site from Altarinda Road, looking northwest showing the driveway.

Item G.1
Packet Page 119
8 Photograph 3. View of the project site, looking north/northeast, approach to driveway traveling up Altarinda Road showing trees and elevation that reduce the visibility of the current building.

Photograph 4. View of the project site, looking south/southwest from Altarinda Road. Trees obscure views to the site and ridgeline beyond.

Item G.1
Packet Page 120
Project Location and Description
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 9 Photograph 5. View of the project site, looking west, showing berm and trees that reduce the visibility of the current building.

Photograph 6. View of the project site from Altarinda Road, looking north showing the level site contrasted with the rising slope of Altarinda Road.

Item G.1
Packet Page 121
10 3 Environmental Impact Analysis
This section evaluates the proposed project’s potential environmental impacts in relation to the impact analysis and conclusions in the Final EIR, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168(c)(2). The existing environmental conditions at the project site are substantially the same as described in Section 3, Environmental Setting, of the Final EIR (City of Orinda 2025).

3.1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that if substantial changes to the project, substantial changes in circumstances, or new information of substantial importance would result in new or substantially more severe significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, a subsequent EIR is required.

The Final EIR determined the environmental impacts of implementation of Plan Orinda would be less than significant or could be reduced to below a level of significance with proposed mitigation measures for all of the topical areas studied except for hazards and hazardous materials, noise, transportation, and wildfire.

The Proposed Project would consist of a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment for the site located at 23 Altarinda Road (Site-DPP-23). Although the City of Orinda has received conceptual plans for future development at the project site, those plans have been withdrawn by the project applicant. Because the plans have been withdrawn, no specific project or physical development is currently proposed. Under the proposed project, the site’s existing conditions, including current land use, vegetation, and existing structures, would remain unchanged. The proposed amendments would revise the site’s land use designation and zoning to allow for residential development.

Overall, the Proposed Project would not change the allowed uses and the potential physical buildout as envisioned and analyzed in the Final EIR. In addition, the existing environmental conditions at the project site are substantially the same as described in Section 3, Environmental Setting, of the Final EIR.

As the proposed project would be consistent with the project analyzed in the Final EIR, impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry 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, and wildfire would be same as were found in the Final EIR.

The proposed project would not result in new, significant impacts that were not analyzed in the Final EIR and would not substantially increase the severity of the significant impacts previously identified. The proposed project would not involve substantial changes to the project evaluated in the Final EIR, substantial changes in circumstances, or new information of substantial importance that would result in new or substantially more severe significant effects not discussed in the Final EIR. No new or substantially more severe significant impacts would occur, and no new mitigation measures would be required. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

Item G.1
Packet Page 122
Environmental Impact Analysis
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 11

3.2 CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(2)
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(2), if a lead agency finds that a later activity is within the scope of a program EIR, no new environmental document is required. Factors that a lead agency should consider when making this determination include if the later activity is within the type of allowable land use, overall planning density and building intensity, geographic area, and covered infrastructure as described in the program EIR.

As described in Section 1.1, Background, of this environmental document, the Final EIR analyzed updates to the Housing Element, Land Use Element, and Safety Element of the General Plan as well as the DPP (which is not in effect), development of up to 2,383 new residential units across 48 sites (43 parcels were identified as potential sites for residential development, and five sites were identified outside of the Theater and Village District), and future infrastructure upgrades, including stormwater drainage, utilities, and transportation improvements. As Plan Orinda was intended to facilitate future development throughout Orinda, the Final EIR programmatically analyzed development of the 23 Altarinda project site as a reasonably foreseeable outcome of the proposed land use designation and zoning changes envisioned under Plan Orinda. The proposed project would consist of a General Plan Amendment and a Zoning Amendment to change the site’s General Plan and zoning designations to allow for multifamily residential uses at a density of up to 25 dwelling units per acre, as anticipated under the Final EIR. The Proposed Project, which is a later activity requiring discretionary approval by the City of Orinda, would be within the scope of the Final EIR for the reasons discussed below.
 Allowable land use. The proposed project would change the project site’s General Plan land use and zoning designations to allow for multifamily residential uses, consistent with the land use assumptions analyzed in the Final EIR. The project site was specifically identified as Site-DPP-23 in the Final EIR as a candidate for residential development. The Final EIR evaluated multifamily residential land use at this location. Therefore, the Proposed Project would involve the same types of land use as described and analyzed in the Final EIR.  Overall planning density and building intensity. The proposed density of up to 25 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the planning assumptions used in the Fina EIR for Site-DPP-23.

Therefore, the Final EIR included an analysis of potential development at the project site of the same density that could be facilitated by the Proposed Project.  Geographic area. The project site at 23 Altarinda Road is located within the geographic boundaries of the Plan Orinda study area and defined in the Final EIR as Site-DPP-23, which was included in the environmental analysis and mapped accordingly. Therefore, the geographic area of the Proposed Project is consistent with the geographic area described and analyzed in the Final EIR.
 Covered infrastructure. The Final EIR evaluated infrastructure capacity, including water supply, wastewater, stormwater, and transportation systems, based on full buildout of Plan Orinda, including Site-DPP-23 (the project site). The proposed project would not exceed the infrastructure demand assumptions used in the Final EIR or facilitate the development of infrastructure not anticipated under the Final EIR.
 Density Bonus. The conceptual plan submitted by the applicant, but later withdrawn, proposed to utilize the allowances of State Density Bonus that would result in a building that is taller than allowed by the proposed General Plan and Zoning designations and with a greater number of units than would otherwise be allowed by the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. State Density Bonus law and other State housing laws preempt the City’s local land use regulations Item G.1
Packet Page 123
12 and substantially limit the City’s local land use authority. Recognizing this reality, the Final EIR assumed that there would be applicants/developers that proposed such State Density Bonus projects. Page 1-11 of the Plan Orinda Draft EIR explained how the analysis accounted for the potential that future projects may include Density Bonus units: “For a conservative analysis, this EIR assesses a higher amount of development potential than the total sites inventory capacity to fully analyze possible environmental impacts based on proposed Plan Orinda implementation programs, account for the possibility that proposed projects could utilize State Density Bonus, and to account for a scenario in which development occurs at a rate higher than it has historically. However, future development proposals would be reviewed to determine whether their impacts have been addressed within this EIR, or if additional site-specific environmental review would be required. Subsequent environmental documents, when required, could “tier” from the Plan Orinda EIR and focus their analysis on new significant impacts or an increase in the severity of impacts pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15152 and 15385.” Furthermore, in the Final EIR’s response to comments, a more comprehensive explanation of the intersection of the EIR analysis and State Density Bonus law was provided on Page 3:
“Commenters asked whether the potential for projects to apply for a density bonus was factored into the EIR analysis and whether projects would be exempt from further analysis at the projectspecific level if they used the density bonus. Future residential projects may use provisions of the State Density Bonus law (California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918) to develop affordable and senior housing, including up to a 50 percent increase in project density, depending on the amount of affordable housing provided, and up to an 80 percent increase in density for certain projects which are 100 percent affordable. The State Density Bonus law also includes incentives to make the development of affordable and senior housing economically feasible. These include waivers and concessions, such as reduced setback, height or minimum square footage requirements. Whether an individual project would use the State Density Bonus law, or which waivers or concessions would be requested, is difficult to predict. The EIR assumed maximum development standards such as building height and residential density. The buildout assumptions included in the Draft EIR are conservative and they likely account for a reasonably foreseeable number of density bonus units and thus could include more units than would likely be built under the City’s development standards alone (i.e., without the use of a density bonus).

However, assuming use of the State Density Bonus law would be speculative, as it is not possible to predict which projects on which sites would use which waivers or concessions and how much density bonus would be requested (CEQA Guidelines Section 15145).” Therefore, the Proposed Project is consistent with the analysis completed for the site in the Final EIR. The City does not know if the developer will decide to utilize the provisions of State Density Bonus law (or other State laws) for a future project application. When and if development is proposed, the appropriate level of CEQA review will be determined at that time.

However, it is important to recognize that a future development application for this site may be able to take advantage of one (or more) CEQA exemptions created by the State. In that case, the City’s ability to require additional CEQA analysis would be limited to what is allowed by State law.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21099(d), aesthetic impacts are not considered significant for qualifying infill projects located within a Transit Priority Area. The project site at 23 Altarinda Road is 0.5-mile from the Orinda BART station, placing it within a designated Transit Priority Area. As such, potential impacts related to visual character, scenic vistas, and light and glare are statutorily exempt from CEQA significance determinations. Additionally, under CEQA Guidelines Item G.1
Packet Page 124
Environmental Impact Analysis
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 13 Section 15064.3, residential projects located within 0.5-mile of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor are generally presumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. This presumption is strengthened when the project does not include significant regional-serving retail, as is the case here. The proposed land use designation and zoning are consistent with the land use assumptions analyzed in the Final EIR and would not allow significant regional-serving retail uses.

Therefore, the Proposed Project would be presumed to result in less-than-significant impacts with respect to both aesthetics and transportation/vehicle miles traveled.

The City has received comments from several public agencies and/or interested parties on the project application, including Caltrans, BART, Moraga Orinda Fire District (MOFD), Central Sanitary District, PG&E, BART, East Bay MUD, Wilton Rancheria, and the Orindawoods Homeowner’s Association. While not required under CEQA, the City is choosing to provide a brief response to selected comment letters where requests were made for additional review and/or information.  Caltrans. In addition to other more minor comments, Caltrans strongly recommends mainline and on-ramp studies of the State Route 24 interchange at Camino Pablo (approximately 0.35 mile from project location), and at St. Stephens Drive (approximately 1.08 mile from project location). Additionally, Caltrans recommend studies of the following intersections: Camino Pablo / Santa Maria Way, Altarinda Road / St. Stephens Drive / El Nido Ranch Road. The Proposed Project, as analyzed as part of the Final EIR, would not generate vehicle trips at a volume or distribution that would result in measurable impacts at these locations, as the Proposed Project consists solely of amendments to land use and zoning designations for 23 Altarinda Road. Residential development at the site, if ultimately proposed, would replace existing office uses, largely offsetting potential minor increases in daily trips. As such, focused analysis of these facilities is not proposed.
 MOFD. The Fire District’s letter highlighted preliminary comments regarding potential development on the site: ensuring adequate fire access roads to accommodate aerial apparatus and other fire equipment (roadway width, minimum number of roadways, providing accessible paths of travel), ensuring vegetation fuel management, adequate fire hydrant spacing, and the requirements for ignition-resistant construction. These elements would be reviewed and incorporated into the project design in coordination with Planning staff and the MOFD to ensure consistency with applicable fire code requirements and best practices for fire safety.  Orindawoods. The Homeowner’s Association (HOA) provided a summary of their objections to the first project submittal, which was later withdrawn. The HOA opposed a building that would be taller than allowed by the General Plan and Zoning designations. As noted in Section 3, the Final EIR acknowledged and evaluated the possibility of such development authorized by State law. As noted, State law limits the City’s ability to regulate and analyze such development. In recognition of the concerns expressed by Orindawoods, this document includes a number of photographs that illustrate the location of 23 Altarinda, which is at a lower elevation than Orindawoods. As the photographs show, the site is relatively level from the lower elevation of the driveway on the southwest corner of the site. Altarinda Road continues to ascend towards the Orindawoods community and individual homes in that community are placed at even higher elevations above the project site. Substantial vegetation and berms (associated with the roadway) to the north and northwest of the site obscure views of the existing building and the ridgeline beyond.

Item G.1
Packet Page 125
14 4 Conclusion
This report demonstrates that the Proposed Project would be consistent with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, and geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure, as described in the Final EIR, and that potential impacts associated with the proposed project would be consistent with potential impacts characterized in and mitigation measures developed for the Final EIR. Revisions to the Final EIR are not necessary because no new significant impacts or impacts of substantially greater severity than previously described would occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, the following determinations are applicable:
 No further evaluation of environmental impacts is required for the Proposed Project.  No subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration is necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163.
 This report is the appropriate level of environmental analysis and documentation for the Proposed Project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c).

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c), this report will be included in the public record and will be considered as part of the deliberations on the proposed project. Documents related to this report will be available at the City of Orinda Planning Department.

Item G.1
Packet Page 126
References and Preparers
Evaluation of Consistency with the Plan Orinda Certified Revised Final Environmental Impact Report 15 5 References and Preparers

5.1 Documents Incorporated by Reference
Orinda, City of. 2024. City Council Resolution 47-24. https://www.planorinda.com/library (accessed October 2024).
_______. 2025a. Plan Orinda Revised Final Environmental Impact Report. State Clearinghouse #2022010392. https://www.planorinda.com/library (accessed September 2025). _______. 2025b. City Council Resolution 13-25 Certification of the Revised Final EIR, with Revised Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Revised Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Plan. https://www.planorinda.com/library (accessed October 2024).

Item G.1
Packet Page 127
16 This page intentionally left blank.

Item G.1
Packet Page 128
Item G.1
Packet Page 129
Item G.1
Packet Page 130
Item G.1
Packet Page 131

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: Administration
Meeting Date: February 3, 2026
SUBJECT:

SSTOC Annual Report Fiscal Year 2024-2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive Report.

BACKGROUND:

The SSTOC was established by the City Council to provide oversight and advisory input on revenues generated by the voter-approved one percent Supplemental Sales Tax (Measure R, 2020). The Commission’s responsibilities include advising the City Council and City staff on planned expenditures and reviewing, monitoring, and reporting on expenditures incurred for priority programs.

This Annual Report addresses Fiscal Year 2024–2025 (July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025) and includes a summary of relevant portions of the City’s Annual Financial audit that fall within the SSTOC’s oversight.

Duties of the Commission:

The SSTOC Bylaws, originally adopted on December 5, 2020, through Resolution #67- 20, define the Commission’s role as making recommendations and providing advice to the City Council and City staff regarding revenues from Measure R (2020).

Item H.1
Packet Page 132
On July 15, 2025, the City Council approved updates to the SSTOC Bylaws (Resolution #45-25), included in the Annual Report document. These updates resulted from a negotiated settlement between the City of Orinda and Orindans for Safe Emergency Evacuations (OSEE) on June 17, 2025, and strengthen the Commission’s focus on evacuation planning, wildfire mitigation, and infrastructure projects supporting safe emergency evacuation.

The SSTOC’s priority program areas include:
· Wildfire threats and reduction of fire fuel from public and private property. · Disaster planning and emergency response, including evacuation. · Coordination and delivery of the programs funded by the tax. · Critical public storm drainage infrastructure.
· Long-term road repair and maintenance.
· Infrastructure improvements to facilitate emergency evacuation.

Requirement for Annual Reports
Resolution #67-20 and the SSTOC Bylaws require the Commission to submit an annual written report to the City Council. The report must include information from the Annual Audit regarding expenditures from Measure R (2020), as well as a summary of the Commission’s activities and accomplishments. The remaining revenues from the 2012 one-half-cent Supplemental Sales Tax, and Measure J (2014) and Measure L (2016) General Obligation Bond Funds have been exhausted.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this report.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Not Applicable.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. SSTOC Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2024-2025
B. SSTOC Annual Report Presentation for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Respectfully Submitted by,
Micki Cronin, Senior Management Analyst
Approved By:

Linda Smith, City Manager
Item H.1
Packet Page 133

CITY OF ORINDA
Supplemental Sales Tax
Oversight Commission
Annual Report
for the
Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
February 3, 2026
Item H.1
Packet Page 134
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 II. Background --------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 III. Wildfire Risk Reduction and Emergency Preparedness ------------------- 4 IV. Road and Storm Drain Repairs and Maintenance ---------------------------- 9 V. Financial Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 Appendix A: SSTOC Bylaws, Updated July 15, 2025 ---------------------------- 16 Appendix B: Road and Storm Drain Repair and Maintenance ------------------- 20 Appendix C: SSTOC Annual Financial Update for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025 --------------------------------------------------------- 23 Item H.1
Packet Page 135
1 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In Fiscal Year 2024-2025, the City of Orinda advanced major initiatives in emergency preparedness, vegetation management, and infrastructure stewardship. Significant progress was made toward strengthening wildfire resilience, enhancing evacuation readiness, and preserving our publicly-maintained roads and storm drains.

While we should celebrate these successes, we must not lose sight of the need to do more. The Measure R Fund Balance ended the 2024-2025 fiscal year up slightly from the prior fiscal year, and present projections show the balance increasing significantly into the 2029-2030 fiscal year.

This suggests that Measure R funds should be available in the coming years to support new or expanded programs to enhance emergency preparedness and reduce wildfire risk in our city.

We strongly recommend spending more of the Measure R balance toward these purposes in the coming years.

Wildfire Resilience
City vegetation management continued to exceed minimum standards. Departments across the City collaborated with MOFD to implement best practices on City-owned lands, major evacuation routes, and the public right-of-way. Notable challenges were resolved through outreach and collaboration, resulting in solutions acceptable to residents and public safety officials. The City coordinated with Moraga, Lafayette and MOFD to discuss combined wildfire risk reduction.

The primary Measure R wildfire mitigation programs for Orindans are the Fire Fuel Incentive Program and the Orinda Chipper Program. Both programs saw an increase in users, volume and reimbursements in the Fiscal Year.

Emergency Preparedness
Emergency preparedness efforts included updating the City’s hazard planning documents, expanding Red-Flag Day Parking Restrictions, and helping to secure new grant funding to support evacuation planning. City staff worked closely with partner agencies, including the Moraga-Orinda Fire District (MOFD), Contra Costa County, and regional emergency management partners, to improve coordination and streamline planning efforts across jurisdictions. Several programs are grant-supported by the State. Planning and groundwork for the OrindaReady.com website started in the Fiscal Year with the site launching in November 2025.

Item H.1
Packet Page 136
2 The City of Orinda and Orindans for Safe Emergency Evacuation (OSEE) settled their lawsuit resulting in revisions to the Plan Orinda EIR, update of the SSTOC charter, and engagement with Ladris to model emergency evacuation scenarios for the City.

Education
The City also remained deeply engaged with the community through public events, education campaigns, newsletters, and administration of Measure R wildfire-mitigation programs, including projects with Orinda’s school students and with Girl Scout troops to learn about fire safety.

Public Roads and Storm Drains
In the reporting year, Measure R funds supported repairs of the remaining Category A culverts and storm drains - the most critical segments of Orinda's drainage infrastructure. Pavement projects on our publicly-maintained roads continued, but no Measure R funds were required for that work this fiscal year.

Finance
For the Fiscal Year 2024-2025, Measure R revenue was just under $4 million, with a significant portion due to interest revenue. Expenditures were just under $3.5 million, so revenue exceeded expenditure by around $500,000. The Measure R unexpended balance is approximately $6.8 million. The City approved its biennial Capital Improvement Plan showing several storm drain projects planned to be funded by Measure R.

Item H.1
Packet Page 137
3 II. SUPPLEMENTAL SALES TAX OVERSIGHT COMMISSION

BACKGROUND
In November 2020, Orinda voters approved Measure R, a general add-on sales tax to replace Measure L (2012), increasing the add-on sales tax from one-half cent to one cent and providing for its collection for 20 years. The collection of the Measure R tax started April 1, 2021.

When Measure R was drafted, the City Council identified several key needs related to critical protection and safety of people and property. Priorities listed for the expenditure of Measure R funds included:
• Wildfire Fuel Reduction and Vegetation Management
• Disaster and Emergency Preparedness
• Storm Drain Improvements to protect against flooding and road collapse • Continued maintenance of public roadways
Measure R Funds were proposed to be used for a combination of both Operating Budget Programs and Capital Improvement Projects.

The City Council established the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission (SSTOC) to make recommendations and provide advice to Council and City Staff regarding planned expenditures for priority programs, services, and projects; and to review, monitor, and report on the expenditures incurred. The SSTOC Bylaws, included in Appendix A were updated and approved by City Council on July 15, 2025 (Resolution #45-25). The update was a result of a negotiated settlement between the City of Orinda and Orindans for Safe Emergency Evacuations (OSEE) on June 17, 2025 to ensure that evacuation planning, mitigation efforts, and infrastructure projects to aid in safe evacuation are adequately addressed in the document.

Item H.1
Packet Page 138
4 III. WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Wildfire Risk Reduction and Emergency Preparedness are shared responsibilities between Orinda residents and property owners, the City of Orinda, and other agencies and groups including Moraga Orinda Fire District (MOFD), Contra Costa County, Lamorinda CERT, Fire Safe Moraga Orinda (FSMO), Moraga Orinda Firewise Network (MOFN), East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), and East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD). It requires a long-term commitment by Orindans, the City, agencies and groups to reduce our risk of wildfire and to be prepared for emergencies, including evacuations. New information, technology, and requirements require ongoing education and action to reduce the risk of wildfires and prepare residents for emergencies as a result of natural disasters.

During 2024-2025 fiscal year, the City of Orinda dedicated substantial time, personnel, and resources to advancing emergency preparedness and wildfire resilience. During this period, Measure R provided funding to:
• Reduce hazardous vegetation and thus reduce the risk of wildfire within the City; • Prepare City staff and other agencies supporting Orinda in case of an emergency in Orinda; and
• Educate Orindans about their responsibilities to reduce wildfire fire risk and prepare for emergencies, including evacuations.

The constant challenge is how to get Orindans to take action to protect themselves, their neighbors, and the City—not just this year but every year. We need to find more ways to encourage this behavior.

Wildfire Risk Reduction
The City is committed to maintaining City property to keep it in compliance with City and MOFD vegetation standards. This includes creating a five-foot non-combustible zone around City Hall and the Orinda Community Center and reducing fuels on City-managed parcels, evacuation routes, and public rights-of-way. For its part, no City-managed property was cited by MOFD for non-compliance. The City also found a successful resolution to the median area between Highway CA-24 and Brookwood Road, where aggressive initial vegetation cutbacks prompted resident concerns. Staff engaged extensively with neighbors and MOFD to reach a mutually acceptable compromise that maintains necessary wildfire-risk reduction.

Orinda has established two programs designed to incentivize Orindans to remove hazardous vegetation – “fire fuel” – on private property to reduce the risk of wildfire: the Fire Fuel Item H.1
Packet Page 139
5 Reduction Incentive Pilot Program and the Chipper Program. While some Orindans are taking advantage of one or both programs, there is still a need for Orindans to do more as evidenced by the large number of residents who receive a pre-citation from MOFD.

Measure R Fire Fuel Reduction Incentive Program
In June 2022, the City Council allocated $400,000 for a grant/incentive program, of which approximately $247,000 remains. For this matching grant program, the City will reimburse 50% of qualifying expenses up to $1,000 to encourage compliance with vegetation standards for the City and MOFD by removing wildfire fuels. The Incentive Pilot Program has been modified twice: in 2023 to expand the scope of work and properties eligible for the grant, and in April 2024, to increase the maximum reimbursement award from $599 to $1,000 and allow applicants to reapply in subsequent years.

During the 2024-2025 fiscal year, 107 grant applications were approved (48% of total applications) totaling $89,164. Of the 107 applications, 73 requested $1,000, with an average reimbursement of $833. Nine applicants previously received funding. During this period, applicants reported spending $390,461 or an average of $3,649 per applicant, which is an increase in reported fuel reductions. It seems likely that further increasing the grant limit will result in significantly greater fuel reductions.

Chipping Program
The Orinda Chipper remains the most popular and well-recognized of the two main programs.

In follow-up surveys, residents have consistently rated their overall satisfaction with the program very highly, at 92.1% or higher. The program is so popular in the middle of the summer it can take upwards of six weeks to have a pile picked up. (The new chipper contract for 2025- 2026 will allow for an increase in chippers to address peak demand times and remove the vegetation in a more timely manner without creating capital cost and on-going maintenance expenditures for that extra capacity.)
From July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025, there were 1,175 completed reservations: 300 first-time users and 887 repeat users. Residents averaged spending nine hours per pile. Overall, Orindans invested more than 10,000 hours removing fire fuels in preparation for their chipper appointments. This resulted in approximately 4,515 cubic yards of hazardous vegetation being removed and disposed of by the Orinda Chipper. (MOFD also runs a Chipper program for the entire fire district.) This resulted in the Chipper program being over budget this year both in disposal fees and service on the equipment.

Item H.1
Packet Page 140
6 Fire Safe Moraga Orinda
Fire Safe Moraga Orinda (FSMO) sent a letter to Orinda Mayor Latika Malkani in March 2025 requesting funding to help residents within Orinda prepare for and respond to potential wildfire. FSMO did not present to the City Council and SSTOC until fiscal year 2025-2026; therefore, the SSTOC’s recommendation and City Council’s decision will be reported next year.

Emergency Preparedness
During fiscal year 2024-2025, City staff dedicated substantial time and resources to advancing emergency preparedness, including updating key emergency management documents, expanding parking restrictions on Red-Flag days, and exploring new technologies to aid in evacuations and fire resilience, as described below.

Planning and Policy Updates
City staff worked to renew major foundational documents: the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and the Safety Element. FEMA officially approved the Contra Costa County Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Orinda LHMP update on Sept. 18, 2024. The plan is valid until an update is resubmitted or until Sept. 18, 2029. The City is in the process of updating the EOP, starting with a Request for Proposals (RFP) in January 2025 and selecting Navigating Preparedness Associates at the end of May 2025. In January 2023, an updated Safety Element was adopted into the City's General Plan, with annual updates shared with the City Council and SSTOC. As a result of the City’s settlement with Orindans for Safe Emergency Evacuations (OSEE) at the end of June 2025, staff is incorporating evacuationspecific tasks into the document. Additional updates for the Safety Element were in process as this report was being written.

Red-Flag Day Parking Restrictions
In 2024, the City expanded the Red-Flag Day Parking Restriction Program to additional neighborhoods in North Orinda. Previously, the program focused on El Toyonal and nearby areas. The program’s objective is to ensure that narrow roads remain passable during red-flag warnings to support timely evacuation and emergency access. There were four red-flag warnings issued during the 2024 fire season.

Evacuation Guide and Trifold
In summer 2024, the City updated the Evacuation Guide and Wildfire Prevention and Emergency Preparedness Resources Tri-fold. The Evacuation Guide, delivered to residents in the October 2024 issue of The Orinda News, features the neighborhoods subject to the red flag day parking restrictions as well as the Minor Road contra flow route. The Tri-fold includes information about Fire Adapted Community Ambassadors, the Measure R Fire Fuels Reduction Item H.1
Packet Page 141
7 Incentive Grant, the Chipper Program, Moraga Orinda Firewise Network, and key terminology.

These guides are available at links on the City of Orinda home page.

Regional Funding for Evacuation Preparedness
The City supported Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s (CCTA) efforts to obtain Caltrans grant funding to develop a new Countywide Emergency Plan (awarded August 2024). This project began in July 2025 and should take two-years to complete and will examine multiple hazard scenarios to include wildfire and man-made incidents. Lamorinda was selected as a regional pilot area for new countywide evacuation management investments. In addition, Lamorinda will benefit from CCTA’s smart-signals modernization project, which among other things will enable signals to be synchronized across jurisdictions to aid in evacuations by allowing signals to “flush traffic out” of a corridor. Construction has not begun on this project.

Risk Management and Evacuation Modeling: Ladris
At the June 11, 2025, SSTOC meeting, Leo Zlimen, CEO of Ladris, provided a demonstration of Ladris’s evacuation modeling software for wildfires designed for counties and municipalities. He explained how the model integrates fire spread patterns with evacuation timelines, allowing communities to understand where residents might be in relation to an advancing fire. The City entered into an agreement with Ladris to assist with evacuation modeling as part of the City’s settlement with OSEE. The staff is currently undergoing training on the software before making aspects of it publicly available to Orindans. This will be reported on in more details in next year’s report.

Educational Programs, Outreach, and Ongoing Support of Local Volunteers The City organized and/or supported several events focused on wildfire and emergency preparedness, including ongoing activities such as organizing the Third Annual Wildfire Prevention and Safety Fair (May 17, 2025); hosting a table at several Orinda Farmers' Market; driving the Chipper truck in the 4th of July parade; participating in the Orinda Police Department’s National Night Out, the Orinda Parks & Recreation’s Trunk or Treat, and MOFD’s Annual Open House in Orinda; working with Orinda students and Girl Scouts troops on wildfire education; and producing educational content pushed out through social media, Orinda’s weekly e-newsletter, and The Orinda Way (April and October editions). There were two new events:
• Tri-Agency Meeting (October 21, 2024) with the Moraga Town Council, the Orinda City Council and the MOFD Board of Directors, organized by MOFD and hosted by Orinda, to discuss Community Wildfire Risk Reduction. Presentations were from Chief Winnacker and an Insurance Representative.

Item H.1
Packet Page 142
8 • Wildfire Community Education Night (April 30, 2025), featured a panel of regional leaders including Mayor Malkani, MOFD Fire Chief Jeff Isaacs, OPD Police Chief Anthony Rossi, City Manager Linda Smith, and State Senator Tim Grayson. The event was well attended, with standing room only. A recording of the event is available on the City of Orinda’s Emergency Preparedness webpage.

Volunteers
City staff continues to support local volunteers engaged in emergency and wildfire preparedness efforts. Staff regularly participates in meetings of the Moraga Orinda Firewise Network, providing updates of City activities and programs at their meetings. Staff also attends Firewise neighborhood meetings to promote City programs. In addition, City staff and the grant consultants supported Fire Safe Moraga Orinda on its grant application to the California FireSafe Council. We are pleased to report on July 26, 2024, FSMO received a $100,000 California FireSafe Council: State Fire Capacity Grant.

New Website: OrindaReady.com
City staff has been meeting with web designers to create a comprehensive platform (OrindaReady.com) to access all emergency preparedness, wildfire risk reduction, and related materials. The goal with OrindaReady.com is to create a centralized platform, organizing information and resources by issue or subject, aiming to make it easier for residents to find the resources most valuable to them. The website soft launched in November 2025 with a public launch in January 2026.

Item H.1
Packet Page 143
9 IV. ROADS AND STORM DRAINS
In the 2024-2025 Fiscal Year, the City expended about $4.8 million on pavement repairs, drainage improvements, and slope stabilization. About $2.4 million of that came from Measure R, for storm drain repairs. No Measure R funds were expended on pavement maintenance and repairs in the reporting year.

Roads
After a decade of significant investment in roads as a result of voter approved measures (Measure L, a half-cent sales tax, and two bond measures totaling $45 million), by the end of 2023-2024, all publicly-maintained residential, arterial and collector roads had been repaired and these funds had been fully expended. Currently, the City uses the following revenue sources to fund Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects of roads, storm drains and emergency preparedness:

Fund # Fund Description
106 Add-On Sales Tax Measure R
200 Gas Tax
205 Transportation Impact Fees
210 Drainage Impact Fees
255 Federal Grants
260 State Grants
263 Transportation Development Act
330 CCTA Return To Source (Local Share)
332 CCTA Supplemental (28C)
335 Road Maintenance Fee (Solid Waste Provider)
700 Capital Improvement (General)
The City Council, through an infrastructure sub-committee, is considering the status of Orinda’s privately-maintained roads and storm drains and what the City’s role should be for their longterm maintenance. The sub-committee’s work led to some Measure R funds being directed toward assessing the condition of Orinda’s privately-maintained roads and storm drains and to include that data in the GIS database of the storm drain network. That effort is still in process as this report is being written.

In the 2019 Road and Drainage Repairs Plan, the Citizens Infrastructure Oversight Commission recommended the following road-maintenance objective:

Complete the repair of the public roads, then maintain these recentlyrepaired roads at the level we have achieved, using recommendations from Item H.1
Packet Page 144
10 the StreetSaver program as a guide, to minimize the long-term cost of maintenance.

Today, Orinda’s road network has a PCI of 83, placing it among the highest-rated systems in the Bay Area. The City’s policy goal is to maintain the road system at or near this level, to help control long-term maintenance costs. Deferring maintenance beyond acceptable limits would eventually require major reconstruction at substantially higher cost.

Following this plan, the City continues to perform routine maintenance, with a bit over 10 miles of roads treated in the 2024-2025 Fiscal Year. No Measure R funds were required for pavement maintenance this past year. However, the CIP budget proposes using Measure R funds for pavement rehabilitation projects in the future as described in the Financial Summary section of the report and Appendix B.

Storm Drains
Many of Orinda's smaller public storm-drain pipes are located under public roads and were replaced during the rehabilitation of the roads. However, very large-diameter pipes or those buried deeper below the surface are too complex and costly to be included in routine road maintenance. In 2019, CIOC and City staff developed the Storm Drain Repair Plan, prioritizing storm drains into categories based on their highest risk of failure in the near term. City staff has continued to use the 2019 Storm Drain Repair Plan as a guide in preparing annual plans for storm drain repairs and maintenance as part of the CIP. Following long-term City policy, staff actively pursues alternative funding sources for storm drain work, as with all capital projects.

In the 2024-25 Fiscal Year, nearly $2.4 million of Measure R funds was allocated to storm drain projects. Of this, nearly $2.2 million was for the repair of the San Pablo Creek Culvert, which came in more than $400,000 under budget. Measure R funds were also directed to three additional storm drain repair projects: Canon Drive, Ranch Road and Brookside Drive. Repairs of these pipes are projected to be completed in the 2025-2026 fiscal year, funded through Measure R.

With the completion of this work, all of the Category A storm drains, those initially identified as the City's most critical storm drains with the largest risk of collateral damage, have been repaired. In the coming fiscal years, significant Measure R funds are planned to begin the Category B storm drain work, with approximately $3.1 million planned for Category B storm drain projects in the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year. Additional details can be found in Appendix B and the Financial Summary section of the report.

Item H.1
Packet Page 145
11 V. Financial Summary
Measure R, a General Fund Add-on Sales Tax (additional one cent or 1.0%), was approved by more than 50 percent of Orinda voters on November 3, 2020. It was first collected on April 1, 2021, and it is scheduled to terminate after 20 years.

Annual Audit
Badawi and Associates, the City’s independent auditors, issued a clean opinion for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025. The City's Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) was issued on November 30, 2025, and submitted to the City Council on December 16, 2025. A detailed report can be found in Appendix C.

Revenue and Expenses
Total revenue for the fiscal year exceeded total expenditures by $498,695, as summarized in Table V-1 below. As a result, the unexpended balance, as of June 30, 2025, was $6,831,021, up from $6,332,326 the prior fiscal year as noted in Table V-2.

Revenue
Total revenue was $3,953,907, a 2.1% increase over the previous year. This was a result of an increase in interest revenue to $249,158 while sales tax revenue slightly declined, as anticipated.

Expenses
Total expenditures were $3,455,213, up significantly from $2,182,258 the prior fiscal year. The increase in expenditures is due mostly to the substantial Storm Drain repair projects completed this reporting year.

A total of $451,903 from the City Manager line item (13% of the total Measure R expenditures) was spent for staffing to support education and outreach and provide general management of the programs, with the remaining $92,849 used for the Fire Fuel Reduction Incentives program.

Virtually all of the remaining Operating Budget Expenditures were for direct action regarding wildfire risk reduction and emergency preparedness. This includes:
• $92,849 for the City’s Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Program (under City Manager/Staff category);
• $254,041 for the Chipper and landfill fees which was over budget by approximately $73,000 (under Public Works category); and
Item H.1
Packet Page 146
12 • $179,146 for Public Works and Parks and Recreation projects to remove wildfire fuels on City-owned property, which was under budget by about $71,000 due to reduced fuel costs and variations in the necessary work required to being property into compliance as a result of vegetation growth or lack thereof (under both Public Works and Parks & Recreation).
$2,371,604 of Measure R funds were expended on Storm Drain repairs, mostly on repair of the San Pablo Creek Culvert, which will reduce the long-term risk of failure for a major culvert under the Orinda Crossroads intersection. We note the project was expected to cost about $3.9 million so the project was about $400,000 under budget. While the project was completed in 2023- 2024, the final bills were not paid until 2024-2025.

No Measure R funds were used for pavement maintenance and repairs in the reporting fiscal year as the City utilized other resources as noted in the Roads and Storm Drains section.

Item H.1
Packet Page 147
13 Table V-1 Income and Expenditure Summary - Measure R (Fund 106) 1 Cent Add-On Sales Tax Item H.1
Packet Page 148
14 Projected Measure R Revenue and Expenditures
Figure V-1 and Table V-2 show the long-term cash flow projections of Measure R for Capital Improvement Plan purposes. It summarizes current and projected Measure R revenue and CIP expenditures through fiscal year 2029-2030 with the caveat that much of the data are only projections, based on currently available information, and are subject to change.

The table shows significant projected expenditures from Measure R for repair and maintenance of roads and storm drains, with a combined total of about $9 million over the 6-year span shown in the table. It is important to note that about $21 million is projected to come from other funding sources.

Overall, the graph of Figure V-1 and Table V-2 illustrate that the City should be able to use Measure R funds in the coming years to incentivize additional wildfire risk reduction efforts by residents and support more emergency preparation. This is in addition to funding storm drain failure risk reduction projects and addressing the likely increase in pavement management costs due to expected Green Infrastructure regulations.

Figure V-1: Measure R fund balance for FY 2023-2024 through FY 2029-2030 Item H.1
Packet Page 149
15 Table V-2 Fiscal Year 2024-2025: Measure R Long-Term Financial Projections dated October 1, 2025. Note the numbers may differ somewhat from the ACFR.

Item H.1
Packet Page 150
16 APPENDIX A
SSTOC BYLAWS - - UPDATED JULY 15, 2025
Item H.1
Packet Page 151
17 Item H.1
Packet Page 152
18 Item H.1
Packet Page 153
19 Item H.1
Packet Page 154
20 Appendix B
Road and Storm Drain Repairs and Maintenance
Roads
With the completion of the 2023 Paving Project, the long-term project to repair our public roads that began in 2012 has been completed. Our focus now turns to annual maintenance projects, to protect this large investment. Orinda's Pavement Management Program follows a preventive-maintenance philosophy. The application of periodic surface treatments significantly delays damage to the deeper sections of the pavement. This, in turn, prolongs the time before significant breakdown of the pavement, when much-more-expensive treatments would be required, and significantly reduces long-term maintenance and repair costs for the roads.

As can be seen in Table B-1, no pavement maintenance work was performed in the 2024 calendar year. The lowest bid for the 2024 Annual Paving Project was well over the project budget. The 2024 project was rebid in January 2025 along with the 2025 project, resulting in considerable savings. This combined project was charged to Fund 335, the Road Maintenance Fee (Solid Waste Provider).

Table B-1: Lengths of Orinda’s Public roads repaired/treated from 2020 through 2025 Year Residential Streets
Miles of Rehabilitation
Arterials and Collectors
Miles of rehabilitation
2020 1.99 4.45
2021 0.31 5.90
2022 0.57 5.03
2023 12.73 3.45
2024 0.0 0.0
2025 8.40 2.22
The Capital Improvement Plan forecasts the need for Measure R funds for pavement rehabilitation projects in the future, with the 2025 through 2029 Annual Pavement projects planned for significant support from Measure R funds. (See the Financial Summary section of the report for more detail.)
Furthermore, gas tax revenues and fees for road repairs from our solid waste provider are expected to decline in coming years, and ongoing road maintenance is expected to be more Item H.1
Packet Page 155
21 costly as the City implements the mandated Green Infrastructure Plan (see below), to reduce the environmental impact of runoff from paved surfaces.

Green Infrastructure Project
As required by the State Water Board's Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, the City of Orinda adopted a Green Infrastructure Plan in 2019. Green infrastructure refers to the construction and retrofit of storm drainage to reduce runoff volumes and treat remaining runoff before it reaches creeks and the San Francisco Bay. The purpose of this Project is to set aside funds for green infrastructure in future paving projects on residential roads. The estimated cost of such work over the next 20 years is $1 million to $2 million
Storm Drains
In the 2024-2025 Fiscal Year, the City completed the last of the Category A storm drain repair projects. The Category A storm drains were considered to be the City's most critical storm drains with the largest risk of collateral damage. Table B-2 below summarizes those projects.

Table B-2: Current large-scale Storm Drain CIP projects Project Scope of Work Cost Funding Source
San Pablo Creek Box
Culvert Repair (CIP
#4187)
Repair 1,300 Linear Foot
concrete culvert adjacent to
Camino Pablo/Orinda Way in
Village District
$2,184,259 Measure R (Fund
#106)
Category A, Group 3
Storm Drain Repairs
(CIP #’s 3103, 3104,
3105)
199 Canon Drive 60” & 42”
CMP diameter pipe.
10 Ranch Road 60” diameter
CMP pipe.
58 Brookside Drive 108”
diameter CMP pipe.
$187,344 Measure R (Fund
#106)
The City has now begun repairs of the Category B storm drain projects, with approximately $3.1 million of Measure R funds planned for these projects in the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year (see Table V-2 in the Financial Summary section). Pipes in the Category B Annual Storm Drain Repair projects are typically 36-inch in diameter or smaller and are normally rehabilitated by lining.

Item H.1
Packet Page 156
22 The 2023 Annual Storm Drain Repair (Category B) Project started in Fiscal Year 2024-2025. About half of the project was completed in the 2025 calendar year, with the remainder completed in Fiscal -Year 2025-2026 at a total cost of about $430,000. The project was funded through Fund 700, the General Capital Projects fund.

The 2024 and 2025 Annual Category B projects (CIP #5008 and #5009) were combined into one project, at an estimated cost of $510,000. Work, which is in process, will be funded by Measure R. The 2026 and 2027 Annual Category B projects are also projected to be funded through Measure R. The CIP lists the combined estimated cost as $700,000.

Item H.1
Packet Page 157
23 Appendix C
SSTOC Annual Financial Update for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025 Item H.1
Packet Page 158
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission
Annual Financial Update
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
Purpose
The City of Orinda has four voter approved local revenue measures. In 2021 the City Council designated the Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Committee (SSTOC) to be the oversight body for Measure R Add-On Sales Tax. The SSTOC replaced the Citizens Infrastructure Oversight Committee (CIOC), which had previously served in an oversight role for the expenditures of General Obligation Bonds and Measure L ½ cent Add-On Sales Tax. As such the SSTOC is also charged with the oversight reporting role for any unexpended balances of GO Bonds and unexpended Measure L balances.

The Administrative Services Director and Finance Staff have prepared this Report for use by the SSTOC based on for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025. This report is intended to incorporate schedules from the June 30, 2025, Annual Comprehensive Financial Report dated November 30, 2025.

Background
The four measures to be reviewed by the SSTOC include:
• 2014 General Obligation Bond ($20 Million Authorization) NO REVIEW REQUIRED – ALL FUNDS EXPENDED AS OF JUNE 30, 2019 (Report Includes historical information) Approved by more than two-thirds of the voters at an election June 3, 2014. $10 million of the bonds were issued as Series A in March 2015 and $10 million of the bonds were issued as Series B in April 2017.
• 2016 General Obligation Bond ($25 million Authorization) NO REVIEW REQUIRED – ALL FUNDS EXPENDED JUNE 30, 2021 (Report Includes historical information) Approved by more than two-thirds the voters at an election June 7, 2016. $25 million in bonds were issued as Series A in April 2017.
• Measure L a General Fund Add-on Sales Tax (additional one-half cent or 0.5 percent).

NO REVIEW REQUIRED – ALL FUNDS EXPENDED JUNE 30, 2024 (Report Includes historical information) Approved by more than 50% of the voters at an election November 6, 2012. The tax is a General Tax. As originally approved by the voters it was scheduled to terminate after 10 years. The tax was first collected by the State in April 2013. In November 2020, the voters approved Measure R which terminated the collection of Measure L funds as of March 31, 2021.
• Measure R a General Fund Add-on Sales Tax (additional one cent or 1.0 percent).

Approved by more than 50% of the voters at an election November 10, 2020. The tax is a General Tax. It is scheduled to terminate after 20 years. The approval of this tax replaced the Measure L tax which was collected at a lower rate. The tax was first collected on April 1, 2021.

Item H.1
Packet Page 159
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission
Annual Financial Update
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
Annual Audit
The City obtains an independent annual audit of its financial statements and completes an Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). The City Council has engaged Badawi & Associates as its independent auditors. In April, the Auditors conducted preliminary review and internal control testing for the annual financial audit. Additional audit work is then undertaken in October and November.

For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025, Badawi & Associates has issued a “clean” opinion. stating that, based on their independent review and testing, the financial statements are fairly presented in all material respects. The Auditor’s opinion covers the respective financial position of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information presented in the ACFR. This is the highest opinion an agency can receive. The Auditors Opinion is included on page one of the ACFR.

The ACFR was issued on November 30, 2025, and presented to the City Council at a public meeting on December 16, 2025.

Voter Approved Taxes Reporting – Separate Funds
The City of Orinda, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. As of June 30, 2025, all funds in the 2014 Bond fund were expended and therefore, there is no current year information to report. This fund has been closed since June 30, 2019.

For Fiscal Year 2020-2021, the 2016 Capital Project Bond fund is reported in the ACFR as a Major Fund for the final time, as all monies were expended as of June 30, 2021, and therefore, there is no current year information to report. This fund has been closed since June 30, 2021.

Because the Add-On Sales Tax are a general tax for the Government-wide Financial Statements the related activities are consolidated with the General Fund. The City Council appropriates these funds for high priority initiatives identified as part of the dialogue with the community when the measures were presented to the voters. The City includes additional schedules in the ACFR (pages 97-104) that differentiate separately the activities in the General Fund between:
• Measure R Add-On Sales Tax (1 cent) Fund # 106; and
• General Purpose – General Fund #100
The ACFR schedules provide a high-level overview of the separate funds used to account for the individual measures. Excerpts from the ACFR have been included at the end of this report as Attachment A.

Item H.1
Packet Page 160
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission
Annual Financial Update
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
The complete ACFR can be viewed on the City website at:
https://www.cityoforinda.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/182 Narrative Summary Related To Voter Approved Funds
The ACFR provides a high-level summary of the activity within the funds. The information in this report provides additional detail and a narrative discussion of the Fiscal Year 2024-25 activity.

Fund 106 Measure R – Add-On Sales Tax (1 Cent)
The Measure R Add-On Sales Tax began being collected on April 1, 2021. For Fiscal Year 2024-25 the fund reported sales tax revenue of approximately $3.7 million and Interest revenue of $250,000. There was approximately $3.5 million in expenditures including items classified as capital improvement projects. The unexpended balance as of June 30, 2025, was $6,831,020. Any remaining balance is available for City Council appropriation in the future.

Item H.1
Packet Page 161
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission
Annual Financial Update
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
Measure R Capital Projects Detail
As shown above, there were four capital projects with expenditures, the largest being the San Pablo Creek Culvert Repair for $2,184,259.

Historical Financial Information
Although the focus of an annual report is the financial activity for the most recent fiscal year, it is also appropriate to report from a historical perspective on the activities since the original approval of these measures. The focus of the charts below will be on the bonds and Measure L which had common expenditures for streets roads, and drainage. The City has received funding in excess of $73.7 million since 2012-13 which includes bond proceeds, tax revenue, reimbursements and interest earned. As of June 30, 2025, approximately $73.7 million has been expended. The following charts provide a high-level summary of the voter approved revenue and expenditures for the four funds combined, since 2012-13.

The two largest contributions towards the historical program revenue since 2013 are General Obligation Bonds $45 million (61%) and Sales Tax $21.5 million (34%). The following chart summarizes the cumulative historical revenue.

Item H.1
Packet Page 162
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission
Annual Financial Update
For The Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
The cumulative expenditures made from the voter approved funds since 2013 have been primarily in the form of Construction costs which represent 86% of the expenditures. The contract design and project management services have been 9% of the total cumulative expenditures. The following chart summarizes the cumulative historical expenditures for the three voter approved funds.

Excerpts for the City’s audited ACFR are attached for reference as Attachment A.

Item H.1
Packet Page 163
City of Orinda
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances General Fund
For the year ended June 30, 2025
General
Purpose
Add-On Sales
Tax (Measure R) Total
REVENUES:

Taxes
Property tax $ 10,339,202 $ - $ 10,339,202
Sales tax 1,356,948 3,704,749 5,061,697
Franchise tax 1,355,415 - 1,355,415
Transient Occupancy Tax 23,030 - 23,030
Property transfer tax 325,927 - 325,927
Use of money and properties 1,116,717 249,157 1,365,874 Service fees
Business license registration 28,622 - 28,622
Vehicle fees and parking fines 37,483 - 37,483
Building inspection 688,330 - 688,330
City attorney 25,316 - 25,316
City clerk 898 - 898
Parks and recreation 3,113,273 - 3,113,273
Planning 225,184 - 225,184
Public works and engineering 198,891 - 198,891
Police 12,337 - 12,337
Other agencies
Federal 42,565 - 42,565
State and local 13,000 - 13,000
Vehicle abatement 26,977 - 26,977
Miscellaneous 26,187 - 26,187
Total revenues 18,956,302 3,953,906 22,910,208
EXPENDITURES:

Current:

City management 644,627 544,752 1,189,379
City attorney 514,033 - 514,033
City clerk 463,645 - 463,645
Administrative services 1,423,382 - 1,423,382
Parks and recreation 2,144,629 - 2,144,629
Public works and engineering 4,681,901 531,517 5,213,418 Police services 4,720,452 7,340 4,727,792
Planning 1,248,120 - 1,248,120
Library operations 67,405 - 67,405
Capital outlay - 2,371,604 2,371,604
Debt service:

Principal 370,000 - 370,000
Interest and fiscal charges 190,344 - 190,344
Total expenditures 16,468,538 3,455,213 19,923,751
Attachment A- Excerpt from FY 2024-25 ACFR
Item H.1
Packet Page 164
City of Orinda
Combining Balance Sheet
General Fund
June 30, 2025
General
Purpose
Add-On Sales
Tax (Measure R) Total
ASSETS
Cash, cash equivalents, and investments 20,065,966 $ 6,339,766 $ 26,405,732 $ Accounts receivable 1,045,263 715,667 1,760,930
Interest receivable 298,611 - 298,611
Prepaids items and deposits 18,339 160 18,499
Due from other funds 1,088,670 - 1,088,670
Total assets $ 22,516,849 $ 7,055,593 $ 29,572,442

LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF

RESOURCES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 2,179,535 $ 224,573 $ 2,404,108 Unearned revenue 30,000 - 30,000
Deposits 3,957,679 - 3,957,679
Total liabilities 6,167,214 224,573 6,391,787
Deferred Inflows of Resources
Unavailable revenues 201,460 - 201,460
Total deferred inflows of resources 201,460 - 201,460
Fund Balances:

Nonspendable 18,339 160 18,499
Assigned - 6,830,860 6,830,860
Unassigned 16,129,836 - 16,129,836
Total fund balances 16,148,175 6,831,020 22,979,195
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources and fund balances $ 22,516,849 $ 7,055,593 $ 29,572,442 Attachment A- Excerpt from FY 2024-25 ACFR
Item H.1
Packet Page 165
City of Orinda
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances General Fund (Continued)
For the year ended June 30, 2025
General
Purpose
Add-On Sales
Tax (Measure R) Total

REVENUES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES 498,693 2,487,764 2,986,457
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES):

Transfers in 31,121 - 31,121
Total other financing sources (uses) 31,121 - 31,121
Net change in fund balances 2,518,885 498,693 3,017,578 FUND BALANCES:

Beginning of year 13,629,290 6,332,327 19,961,617
End of year $ 16,148,175 $ 6,831,020 $ 22,979,195
Attachment A- Excerpt from FY 2024-25 ACFR
Item H.1
Packet Page 166
City of Orinda
Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Budget to Actual - General Fund
For the year ended June 30, 2025
Variance with
Actual Final Budget
Original Final Amounts Positive (Negative)
REVENUES:

Taxes
Property tax - $ $ - $ - $ -
Sales tax 3,700,000 3,700,000 3,704,749 4,749
Franchise tax - - - -
Transient occupancy tax - - - -
Property transfer tax - - - -
Use of money and properties 36,000 36,000 249,157 213,157 Service fees
Business license registration - - - -
Vehicle fees and parking fines - - - -
Building inspection - - - -
City attorney - - - -
City clerk - - - -
Administrative services - - - -
Parks and recreation - - - -
Planning - - - -
Public works and engineering - - - -
Police - - - -
Other agencies
Federal - - - -
State and local - - - -
Vehicle abatement - - - -
Miscellaneous - - - -
Total revenues 3,736,000 3,736,000 3,953,906 217,906
EXPENDITURES:

Current:

City management 472,390 812,390 544,752 267,638
City attorney 5,000 5,000 - 5,000
City clerk - - - -
Administrative services 4,000 4,000 - 4,000
Parks and recreation 200,000 - - -
Public works and engineering 2,952,730 2,365,803 531,517 1,834,286 Police services 45,000 45,000 7,340 37,660
Planning - - - -
Library operations - - - -
Capital outlay - 2,371,604 2,371,604 -
Debt service:

Principal - - - -
Interest and fiscal charges - - - -
Total expenditures 3,679,120 5,603,797 3,455,213 2,148,584 REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES 56,880 (1,867,797) 498,693 2,366,490 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES):

Transfers in - - - -
Transfers out - - - -
Total other financing sources (uses) - - - 4,515,074
Net change in fund balances $ 56,880 $ (1,867,797) 498,693 $ 2,366,490 FUND BALANCES:

Beginning of year 6,332,327
End of year $ 6,831,020
Budgeted Amounts
Add - On Sales Tax (Measure R)
Attachment A- Excerpt from FY 2024-25 ACFR
Item H.1
Packet Page 167
Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission
Annual Report for the
Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
February 3, 2026

CITY OF ORINDA
Item H.1
Packet Page 168
• Revenue: $3,953,906, a 2.1% increase over the previous year • Expenditures: $3,455,213, up significantly from $2.2M the prior year
• ~$1.1M (31%) on wildfire risk reduction and emergency preparedness
• ~$2.4M (69%) on major storm drain repairs
• Fund balance: ~ $6.8M, up from ~$6.3M the prior year
• Badawi and Associates issued a “clean” opinion of the financial statements
Measure R - 2024/2025 Financial Overview Item H.1
Packet Page 169
Measure R Fund Balance - Projections
Considering these reserves, it seems clear that the City has the flexibility to further increase the Measure R funds used for wildfire risk reduction.

Item H.1
Packet Page 170
Wildfire Risk Reduction - - Accomplishments
• The Orinda Chipper Program
• Continues to be very popular and effective
• 1,175 completed reservations and ~4,500 cubic yards removed • Wait times were several weeks at times in the peak season • The new chipper contract will allow adding more chippers when needed • Fire Fuels Reduction Incentive Pilot Program
• Limit had been increased to $1,000 in April, 2024
• 107 applications approved in FY 24/25; total reimbursed ~$90K • Average request; $833 - - 73 applicants requested $1,000 • Applicants reported spending ~$390K - - An average of $3,649 per household • Increasing the limit increased fuels reductions by ~$1,000 per household • We conclude that a significant further increase of the limit would likely be productive.

Item H.1
Packet Page 171
Wildfire Risk Reduction - - Accomplishments
• City-property parcels are maintained to meet all City and MOFD vegetation management standards
• Created a five-foot non-combustible zone around City Hall and the Orinda Community Center
• Orinda Fire-Savvy Plant Guide – updated August 2025.
• Available on the City website, at the Library, and at the Orinda Community Center • Volunteer Support
• Support for Moraga Orinda Firewise Network meetings
• Assisted Fire Safe Moraga Orinda (FSMO) on $100K grant application to California Fire Safe Council
• Evaluating a FSMO proposal to leverage City funds following a similar model.

Item H.1
Packet Page 172
Emergency Preparedness - - Accomplishments
• Updated the Orinda Evacuation Guide and the Wildfire Prevention and Emergency Preparedness Resources Trifold
• Distributed by mail and on City website
• OrindaReady.com launched November 2025
• Platform to access materials for wildfire risk reduction, emergency preparedness, etc.
• Risk Management and Evacuation Modeling: Ladris
• Available for residents to explore the model
• Regional Funding for Emergency Preparedness
• Supported Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s Caltrans grant application to develop a new Countywide Emergency Plan. The grant was awarded August 2024
Item H.1
Packet Page 173
Emergency Preparedness - - Accomplishments
• Educational Programs and Outreach efforts included:
• Orinda Outlook weekly e-newsletter, and The Orinda Way (April and October)
• Tri-Agency Meeting (October 21, 2024) with Moraga, Orinda, and MOFD • Wildfire Community Education Night (April 30, 2025)
• Third Annual Wildfire Prevention and Safety Fair (May 17, 2025) • Working with Orinda students and Girl Scouts troops on wildfire education
• Red-Flag Day Parking Restrictions
• Expanded the Red-Flag Day Parking Restriction Program to additional neighborhoods in North Orinda
Item H.1
Packet Page 174
Roads and Storm Drains 2024-2025
 ~$5M spent on pavement and storm-drain maintenance/repairs  ~$2.4 M came from Measure R - - For storm drain repairs  The remainder came from other sources, including gas taxes, CCTA Return to Source, solid waste provider fees, the
Road/Drainage Stabilization Fund, and the Stormwater Utility Assessment
Item H.1
Packet Page 175

CONCLUSIONS
• Measure R revenue in FY 24-25 was over $3.9M.
• Measure R FY 24/25 ending fund balance was about $6.8 M • Projections indicate the fund balance in FY 25-26 to be ~$5.2M but will climb to over $13M by the end of FY 29-30 We have accomplished a lot, but we must do more.

It appears we will have sufficient funds to pursue
more aggressive means to reduce our critical wildfire
risk, while continuing to protect our investment in our Roads and Storm Drains over the next several years.

Item H.1
Packet Page 176

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Department: Planning
Meeting Date: February 3, 2026
SUBJECT:

State Housing Legislation and Housing Element Implementation Update – 2025 Calendar Year
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Receive a presentation and discuss the recent State housing legislation and Housing Element implementation activities.

RECOMMENDATION:

The City Council will receive a presentation will on recent State legislation and a summary of the Housing Element implementation activities as a preview to submitting the statemandated Annual Progress Report (APR) no later than April 1st, 2026.

BACKGROUND:

On January 31, 2023, the City Council adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element. Following adoption, the Housing Element was submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. On March 30, 2023, HCD certified the City’s Housing Element, having determined it to be in full compliance with state Housing Element law (Letter of Certification).

Many new state laws have passed in the legislature. As early as 2017, Senate Bill (SB) 35 - Planning and Zoning: Affordable Housing: Streamlines Approval Process and in 2019, SB 330 – The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 were enacted. Other State laws that continue the emphasis on streamlining and housing production include – SB 9/450 (2021), SB 684/1123 (2025), SB 4 (2023), SB 79, AB 130 & 131 (2025). This update will review the main characteristics of each of the most recent housing laws.

Since the adoption of the Housing Element, the City has focused on the implementation action program. Recent and continuing initiatives have included rezoning housing element sites, consideration of an inclusionary housing ordinance, development of citywide objective design standards, and more. In addition, many other housing related activities are continuing and are regularly reported on through the Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) process.

As required by State law (Government Code Section 65400), every year, the City must report in the Housing Element APR progress towards meeting the City’s assigned Item H.2
Packet Page 177
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and the status of program implementation.

Orinda was assigned 1,359 RHNA units for the 6th Cycle Housing Element. The APR must be considered at a public meeting of the City Council, and members of the public must have an opportunity to provide oral testimony and written comments. The APR is due April 1 of each year for the preceding year and is considered overdue 60 days after April

1. The City currently remains obligated to implement its adopted and state-certified Housing Element. The City’s Housing Element obligations include submitting the state-mandated Annual Progress Report to the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development and to the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) no later than April 1.

DISCUSSION:

State legislation continues to prioritize building permit streamlining and housing production to address the State’s housing crisis. Communities seek to understand the new mandates and adapt regulations to make sure they do not unduly hinder the development of new housing. The update on State legislation will outline important thresholds and parameters of the most recent laws such as Senate Bill 1123, Senate Bill 79, Assembly Bills 130 and 131.

The 2025 Annual Progress Report (APR) on the City’s progress towards meeting the Housing Element’s goals for the 2025 calendar year (January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2025) will be completed in the spring. The APR must also report the City’s progress towards meeting the programs listed in the Housing Element including the deadline for implementation, and progress towards completion.

Table D of the APR reports on the progress toward program implementation for both the 5th Cycle and 6th Cycle. The 6th Cycle includes a total of 33 programs that must be implemented throughout the planning period. Some programs include a specific deadline, such as rezoning programs that have a three-year and 120-day deadline, whereas other programs are ongoing or completed annually
NEXT STEPS:

Planning staff anticipates meeting the City’s Housing Element obligations and returning in next month with the program actions table (Table D) updated with the request to submit the state-mandated Annual Progress Report to HCD no later than April 1, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact of the State Housing Legislation and Housing Element Update involves staff time to monitor and track changes to the regulatory environment.

The upcoming Annual Progress Report does not have a fiscal impact. However, based on Government Code Section 65400 as stated below, the City could potentially absorb legal costs if the Annual Progress report is not submitted in a timely manner. Government Code Section 65400, states in part:

Item H.2
Packet Page 178
If a court finds, upon a motion to that effect, that a city, county, or city and county failed to submit, within 60 days of the deadline established in this section, the housing element portion of the report required pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) that substantially complies with the requirements of this section, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within 60 days
Respectfully Submitted by,
Lashun Cross, Planning Director
Approved By:

Linda Smith, City Manager
Item H.2
Packet Page 179

Orinda City CouncilFebruary 3, 2026

Orinda City Council
February 3, 2026