Pinole City Council
January 21, 2025

CITY COUNCIL
Cameron Sasai, Mayor
Anthony Tave, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member
Devin T. Murphy, Council Member
Maureen Toms, Council Member

PINOLE CITY COUNCIL

MEETING AGENDA
January 21, 2025
5:00 PM
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR
Attend VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE – Details provided below How to Submit Public Comments:

In Person:

Attend meeting at the Pinole City Council Chambers, fill out a yellow public comment card and submit it to the City Clerk.

Via Zoom:

Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing. Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here. Zoom also allows you to join the meeting by phone.

From a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89335000272
Webinar ID: 893 3500 0272
By phone: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1 (253) 215-8782 or +1 (346) 248-7799 • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be afforded up to 3 minutes to speak (subject to modification by the Mayor) • Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment When the Mayor opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute. To comment with your video enabled, please let the City Clerk know you would like to turn your camera on once you are called to speak.

Written Comments:

All comments received before 3:00 pm the day of the meeting will be posted on the City’s website on the agenda page (Agenda Page Link) and provided to the City Council prior to the meeting. Written comments will not be read aloud during the meeting. Email comments to [email protected] Please indicate which item on the agenda you are commenting on in the subject line of your email.

City Council
Agenda - January 21, 2025

OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 26. They are retelecast the following week. The Community TV Channel 26 schedule is published on the city’s website at www.pinole.gov.

VIDEO-STREAMED LIVE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE, www.pinole.gov and remain archived on the site for five (5) years.

If none of these options are available to you, or you need assistance with public comment, please contact the City Clerk, Heather Bell at (510) 724-8928 or [email protected].

Americans With Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Meeting or you need a copy of the agenda, or the agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 724-8928. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.

Note: Staff reports are available for inspection on the City Website at www.pinole.gov. You may also contact the City Clerk via e-mail at [email protected].

Ralph M. Brown Act. Gov. Code § 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies, which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

City Council
Agenda - January 21, 2025

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself /herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov't Code § 87105.

4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.

A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Manager, Kelcey Young, City Attorney, Eric Casher, and Human Resources Director, Stacy Shell
Employee organization: AFSCME Local 1, AFSCME Local 512, and the Management Compensation Plan (MCP)

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION

6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. PLEASE SEE THE COVERSHEET OF THE

AGENDA FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff

City Council
Agenda - January 21, 2025

F. City Attorney Report

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations

1. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day

2. National Day of Racial Healing

3. Holocaust Day of Remembrance

4. Lunar New Year

5. Fred Korematsu Day of Civil Liberties and the Constitution

6. Recognizing the City of Pinole's Police Officer of the Year

7. Recognizing the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District's Firefighter of the Year B. Presentations

1. "Glow Pinole" Summary by Community Services Director Dwyer

2. Community Services Department Overview by Director Dwyer

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.

A. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting on December 17, 2024.

B. Receive the December 14, 2024– January 17, 2025 – List of Warrants in the Amount of $1,725,968.80, the December 20, 2024 Payroll in the Amount of $542,424.45, the January 3, 2025 Payroll in the Amount of 523,129.86, and the January 17, 2025 Payroll in the Amount of $729,784.80.

C. Update on City of Pinole's Timely Compliance with Assembly Bill 1332 (AB 1332) – Preapproval Program for Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Plans Action: Receive and File Report (Lilly Whalen)
D. Adopt a resolution accepting $7,500 from Marin Clean Energy (MCE) for implementation of a Community Partnership Program Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Lilly Whalen, Kapil Amin)
E. Adopt a resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a second task order to amend the on-call Consulting Services Agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. for services related to the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 Project. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Faby Guillen)

City Council
Agenda - January 21, 2025

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parte communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.

A. Consider Adoption of Updated Development Impact Fees Action: Adopt a Resolution per Staff Recommendation (David Hanham)
B. First Read of Pinole Municipal Code Amendments related to Housing Element Programs No. 4, 5 12 and 13, focusing on accessory dwelling units (ADUs), junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs), and unit and lot split projects proposed under Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) and Regulatory Consistency Action: Conduct Public Hearing and Waive First Reading of Ordinance (David Hanham, Justin Shiu)

11. OLD BUSINESS
None

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report Action: Receive and File Report (Markisha Guillory)

13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Open only to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to Be Heard, Agenda Item 6 Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes for City Council items and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future meeting.

14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of February 4, 2025 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

I hereby certify under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of Pinole City Hall, 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA, and on the City’s website, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda. _______________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
POSTED: Thursday, January 16, 2025 at 4:30 pm

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES
December 17, 2024

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The City Council Meeting was held in a hybrid format (in-person and via Zoom videoconference and broadcast) from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Toms called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:03 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision; (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov. Code § 87105.

A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Maureen Toms, Mayor
Cameron Sasai, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Devin Murphy, Council Member
Anthony Tave, Council Member
B. STAFF PRESENT
Kelcey Young, City Manager
Heather Bell, City Clerk
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
City Clerk Heather Bell announced the agenda had been posted on Thursday, December 12, 2024 at 4:30 p.m. with all legally required written notices. No written comments had been received in advance of the meeting.

Speaking to Consent Calendar Item 9A, City Clerk Bell noted there had been some highlighted text in the draft meeting minutes for the November 19 and December 3, 2024 meetings for staff to confirm speaker names which were identified as follows:
• November 19, 2024 City Council meeting minutes: Page 6, correct the spelling of the name Jonay Brownlee and Page 10 confirm the name and spelling for Manelle Sablan

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

• December 3, 2024 City Council meeting Minutes: Page 2, confirm the name Michael Baum; Page 4, correct the spelling for Tracy Walker and Page 5, confirm the name Captain Ludwick.

City Clerk Bell advised all changes would be reflected in the final version of the approval of the two sets of meeting minutes. She added the attachment for Item 12A had been revised, distributed to the City Council, posted for public review online and made available in the Council Chambers.

Following an inquiry, the Council reported there were no conflicts with any items on the agenda.

4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION: None
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION There were no Closed Session Items.

6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Irma Ruport, reported she received an email about shaping the future of community media in the City of Pinole from David Snell, Pinole Community Television (PCTV) which she read into the record and which sought feedback from the community on PCTV via a survey available on the City website. Mr. Snell has been with the City of Pinole for 27 years, and she appreciated everything he has done for the City and for the community. She asked the City Council to acknowledge the work of Mr. Snell and the importance of PCTV. She emphasized Mr. Snell was needed now more than ever and she urged the community to participate in the survey and help PCTV be better.

Harpreet Sandhu, Senior District Representative, representing Congressman John Garamendi, took the opportunity to congratulate Maureen Toms and Devin Murphy on their re-election to the City Council and welcomed the new Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. He emphasized the importance of the City of Pinole to Congressman Garamendi who desired to continue to work with the City and incoming City Council, Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. He thanked the City Council for its service.

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Mayor Toms reported she attended the Mayors’ Conference at which time reports from representatives from various committees had been provided along with acknowledgment of a number of retirements of Mayors’ and Council members representing a number of cities in Contra Costa County. As a result, there are a number of openings for committee assignments. Council members were able to self-nominate with the deadline this week for those interested.

Mayor Toms also reported she had been appointed to the League of California Cities Housing Community and Economic Development Committee and she hoped other Council members had the opportunity to volunteer for some of the Policy Committees. She also attended the NIMS Overview for Senior Officials at the Office of Emergency Services (OES), a free training opportunity where everyone learned about the different roles of emergency responders to the OES and when the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) would be activated. She encouraged staff and other electeds to attend the training sessions when offered. In addition, she attended an East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA) meeting and she highlighted the approval of a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which would increase rates for all jurisdictions over the next five years due to equipment replacement needs.

B. Mayoral & Council Appointments: None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Mayor Pro Tem Sasai announced his appointment to the League of California Cities Transportation Communication and Public Works Policy Committee. He also reported the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) meeting for the month of December had been canceled with the next meeting scheduled for January 24, 2025.

Council member Murphy wished everyone Happy Holidays; thanked City staff for the coordination of the Annual Tree Lighting ceremony and Holiday Breakfast; thanked the Community Services Department staff for its work to ensure the holidays had joy and pleasantry and reported he would continue to serve on the League of California Cities Transportation Communication and Public Works Policy Committee. He also reminded everyone of the Green Empowerment Zone, a new regional body that builds upon the comparative advantage provided by the regional concentration of highly skilled energy workers by providing access to grants, loan programs, workforce training program, and private sector investment in the renewable energy sector, noting the largest industrial zone in Northern California was Contra Costa County. He highlighted the significant challenges Contra Costa and Solano Counties face and emphasized both counties would be engaged with the Green Empowerment Zone.

Council member Tave wished everyone Happy Holidays and he looked forward to the New Year.

Council member Martinez-Rubin wished everyone a Happy and Healthy Holiday. She reported she attended the West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) School Tour at which time she met the new Principal for Pinole Valley High School who spoke to the initiatives the WCCUSD had initiated over the past calendar year and would continue to foster into the future; Tree Lighting ceremony and thanked City staff for making such a delightful and happy event at Fernandez Park and participated in the League of California Cities Municipal Finance Institute over a two-day period. She briefed the City Council on the presentations provided with the slide sets able to be viewed at www.calcities.org/mfi.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Council member Martinez-Rubin also looked forward to serving on the League of California Cities Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee, having received a Presidential appointment for one year. This group would continue to review taxation reform and establish communication and connection among different cities that face an ongoing need to secure financing and revenue and explore new opportunities for financing into the future.

Council member Martinez-Rubin further referencing the recent tsunami alert, and encouraged the public to sign up with the County system for emergency alerts along with the regular communication channels in the City of Pinole with more information available at www.cwsalerts.com.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED (Items 7A through 7C)
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Sasai/Mayor Toms for a new annual proclamation acknowledging Fred Korematsu Day, to be celebrated on January 30 of each year.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Toms, Sasai, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Sasai/Council member Murphy for the City Council to discuss and consider the adoption of a resolution reaffirming the City’s commitment to supporting and valuing all members of the Pinole community and to protecting its democratic values, the rule of law and the civil rights and liberties of Pinole’s residents, workers and visitors.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Toms, Sasai, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Mayor Pro Tem Sasai advised when asked by the Mayor he had provided staff draft language for both of his future agenda item requests.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
City Manager Kelcey Young thanked City staff for all of the community events over the past couple of months and the City Council for attending the events. While many events had concluded over the year, Glow Pinole would continue through December 20, 2024, where residents were encouraged to participate in decorating their homes for the holidays with multiple awards possible.

She added the year end audit for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/2024 had concluded with the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) to be issued by December 31, 2024 with the auditor scheduled to present the report at the January 21, 2025 City Council meeting and she thanked Finance Director Markisha Guillory and her team for getting the work done.

City Manager Young also reported City Hall would be closed December 24, 2024 through January 2, 2025, although some City staff in public works and public safety would continue to work in various capacities; the Public Works Director position had closed with interviews scheduled in early January 2025, with an announcement hopefully to be provided at the next City Council meeting and the presentation of the new Police Chief was expected at the next City Council meeting. She thanked Interim Police Chief/Commander Jeremy Crone for taking on the role during the interim and Acting Police Chief Matt Avery who will retire at the end of the month was thanked for his service to the City. She wished everyone Happy Holidays.

F. City Attorney Report
City Attorney Eric Casher wished everyone Happy Holidays.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED (Items 7E through 7F)
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMNUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations: None
B. Presentations

1. Creekside Park Presentation by Friends of the Pinole Creek Watershed City Manager Young introduced Ann Moriarty and Jon Jarvis with Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and students from Pinole Valley High School who would provide a presentation on Creekside Park.

Ann Moriarty, Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Creekside Park Project, which included an overview of Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and the City of Pinole’s collaboration on projects which included: Demonstration Project, restoration of tidal marsh and riparian vegetation along 1,000 feet of lower Pinole Creek which had been completed in 2010; Steelhead Trout Fish Passage completed in 2016; Pinole Library Native Plant Garden; Pollinator Garden in Upper Watershed and trash and engagement efforts.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Jon Jarvis, Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, highlighted the Creekside Park Project, a proposal to create a gathering place at the pedestrian bridge which serves to provide visual access to the creek, a place for high school students to gather and patrons of the Pinole Valley Shopping Center Mall to bring food and sit and enjoy Pinole Creek. The land status and ownership of the project area was clarified along with the details of BASE Landscape Architecture having sent a team to meet with Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and Pinole Valley High School students to develop native plants, art, trail tread, signs and picnic tables and benches.

Mr. Jarvis explained that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had contacted Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and visited the Creekside Park Project and encouraged Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed to apply for grant funds through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funded Notice of Funding Opportunity, to fund projects that have measurable positive impacts in underserved communities of the San Francisco Bay Area, including improving the land and water of communities with environmental justice concerns and addressing climate change and with proposals due by April 17, 2025.

Natalie Szumlas, Senior, Pinole Valley High School, Intern Earth Team, provided an overview of litter assessments of the creek and suggested if the trail were to become a Creekside Park, students would take ownership of the space and respect it. Earth Team had helped with community outreach efforts for the park, tabling at the trail and at Peet’s Coffee and with ideas having been presented on the potential for the park with feedback encouraged. All responses have been positive from the local community and schools. Since Pinole Valley High School would be the main users of the park and trail, making sure the students respect the space was the largest concern, with discussions in collaboration meetings with teachers and Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, on how to enforce mindful behavior. The many benefits to students with the space upgraded were noted and may encourage students to care for the space out of respect for peers and the community alike.

Ms. Moriarty welcomed any questions from the City Council.

City Manager Young commented although the City was taking the lead on the grant application, there was no way the City would be able to complete this effort without the exceptional work of Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and the benefits to the community would be exceptional.

Responding to questions from Council member Martinez-Rubin, Ms. Moriarty clarified the Principal of Pinole Valley High School had been introduced to the project and there had been discussions about working together and engaging Pinole Valley High School students, with the Principal interested in further collaborations. She also acknowledged a request to discuss with the Principal of Pinole Valley High School “his focus would be on 45 students since that was his capacity” and she recognized Pinole Valley High School included students not only from Pinole but from the Cities of Richmond and San Pablo and students of the high school represent the community.

Mayor Toms thanked Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed for its ongoing work and highlighted the monthly Creek Cleanups with the next event scheduled for Saturday, December 21, 2024 with information available on social media and the Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed website.

Council member Tave thanked the Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed team for its work over the years.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.

A. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meetings on November 19, 2024 and December 3, 2024
B. Receive the November 23, 2024 – December 13, 2024 List of Warrants in the Amount of $947,263.56 and the December 6, 2024 Payroll Amount of $534,202.13 C. Adopt a Resolution to Accept a Two-Year Policy Fund Grant from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future, including Authorization for the City Manager to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the San Francisco Foundation and Coro, to Support the Implementation of Key Programs in the City’s Certified Housing Element and Enhance the Effectiveness of the Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program. Action: Adopt a resolution per Staff Recommendation (Lilly Whalen)
D. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 10.56 “Speed Zones” of the Pinole Municipal Code. Action: Waive Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance per Staff Recommendation (Eric Casher, Faby Guillen) E. Adopt a Resolution to Approve a First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with R3 Consulting Group, Inc., for Additional Scope Related to Solid Waste, Recycling and Organic Material Agreement Negotiation, In an Amount Not to Exceed $25,000 for a Total Contract Amount of $73,000. (Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Faby Guillen)
F. Resolutions Necessary for Implementation of Recent Transaction and Use Tax Measure by CDTFA. Action: Adopt Resolutions per Staff Recommendation (Eric Casher, Markisha Guillory)
G. Accepting and Declaring the Results of the Canvass of the November 5, 2024 Municipal Election. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heather Bell)
H. Republic Services Annual Rate Adjustment. Action: Approve the rate increased by Republic Services starting January 1, 2025 (Kelcey Young)

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Murphy/Martinez-Rubin to approve Consent Calendar Items 9A, subject to the amendments read into the record by the City Clerk and Items 9B through 9H, as shown.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Toms, Sasai, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

10. COUNCIL REORGANIZATION
A. Presentations to Mayor Toms
City Manager Young expressed her appreciation to Mayor Toms for her work and commitment over the past year and her assistance during several key staff transitions. She also recognized the Mayor’s constant support of City staff and she was pleased they would continue to have the opportunity to work together over the next four years. At this time, she presented a small gift (gavel) in appreciation.

Mayor Toms acknowledged this had been a year of transition with staff and she thanked City staff, the City Council and everyone for seeing them through this transitional period. She also recognized her family present in the audience and acknowledged serving on the City Council was a significant time commitment and having family support was very important.

Mayor Toms also recognized the diversity in approach and opinions of the City Council and effort to work together for a common goal, to serve the community. She highlighted the staff changes including welcoming City Manager Young in August 2024 and Melissa Klawuhn, the new Chief of Police currently serving with the Contra Costa County Sherrif’s Department, who would start with the City in January 2025. It was anticipated a new Public Works Director would be hired in January 2025, with recruitment for a new City Engineer continuing. Also, a new CIP Manager had been recently welcomed. There have also been some departures and upcoming retirements.

During the December 3, 2024 City Council meeting, Acting Police Chief Avery had been recognized for his service and upcoming retirement and she again thanked him for his service along with Interim Police Chief Crone for filling the gap between now and when the new Police Chief starts her employment with the City. She thanked all of the City staff for their service to the community.

Mayor Toms also highlighted a number of community events over the past year which included:

EGG-Stravaganza Easter event for children at Fernandez Park, Earth Day Walk, Pinole Pride, Fourth of July Drone Show, Car Show, Annual Tree Lighting and Glow Pinole. She also highlighted the efforts of all involved in the creation of the new City seal and logo, release of the public review draft and implementation of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP), approval of a Plastic Foodware Ordinance, Environmental Preferable Purchasing Policy and Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate Program.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Mayor Toms also referenced the adoption of the Housing Element in 2023 and the beginning of implementation efforts with an application to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for the approval of a Prohousing designation and the award of grant funds to provide affordable housing, along with updates of City ordinances, work on streamlining the City’s permitting process, repair of roads from storm damage from the last two winter seasons and work with the County OES on a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). She encouraged everyone to sign up for CWS alerts and sign up for the Pinole Mobile App.

Additional accomplishments for 2024 include the continued collaboration with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) and ceremony at Station 74 to name Station 74 after two cherished Fire Captains from the Pinole Fire Department, Captains Rich Voisey and Robert Ramos.

Mayor Toms emphasized the City was striving to make the City safer through the adoption of a new ordinance requiring residents to store firearms in locked containers or secured with a trigger lock when not in use, a number of safety improvements had been completed or recently approved, and there were a number of housing developments either completed, in the process of development or approved along with tenant improvements and other commercial uses in the City.

Mayor Toms commented the City had been working on community engagement and completed the Pinole Mobile App and she again encouraged everyone to download the app to be aware of any events. In addition, she thanked the voters of Pinole for trusting the City Council with their tax dollars with the approval of Measure I which would help address the City’s budget constraints.

Mayor Toms further congratulated the incoming leadership on the City Council and she looked forward to supporting the new Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem and continuing to support the community.

Mayor Pro Tem Sasai recognized this was a year of uncertainty and he too recognized the effort to pass Measure I and the staff transitions with a new City Manager and Police Chief. He thanked Mayor Toms for her steady hand and leadership. It had been an honor working with her the past four years and he looked forward to the next four years.

Council member Murphy also expressed his appreciation to Mayor Toms, thanked her for her leadership and getting the City Council through the year, pushing them forward, working on environmental issues, being a critical partner and he looked forward to the next four years.

Council member Tave thanked Mayor Toms, it had been an honor working with her and he appreciated he had been able to call her and rely on her leadership and guidance on many issues in Pinole. He was pleased to see Mayor Toms and Council member Murphy had been reelected to keep the same City Council moving forward and ensure that consistency particularly after all of the work the past four years. He looked forward to working with Mayor Toms in the new year.

Council member Martinez-Rubin also appreciated working alongside Mayor Toms over the years, appreciated the expertise she had shared of her experience over time as a Planner in Contra Costa County and thanked her for the fact they had a rotation on the City Council and had the ability to enjoy as a City, the representation of leadership from backgrounds and different levels of experience.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Council member Martinez-Rubin appreciated the Mayor’s ongoing emphasis on service to the community as a purpose for serving on the City Council and her presence in local community activities as well as her involvement with local businesses and business leaders who have noticed that level of involvement. She looked forward to continuing to serve with Mayor Toms over the next couple of years.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Vincent Salimi, thanked Mayor Toms for her leadership and dedication during her tenure as Mayor. He congratulated both Mayor Toms and Council member Murphy on their reelection to the City Council. He also congratulated new Mayor Cameron Sasai, as the first Filipino Council member/Mayor for the City of Pinole which was a historical and proud moment in the community.

He was also proud of Council member Tave who would become the Mayor Pro Tem and was confident he would continue to serve with dedication. He wished everyone a Happy New Year.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
At this time the City Council moved to Item 10. D. Administer Oaths to Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem City Clerk Bell introduced special guest, Council member Murphy’s mother, Hadiya Williams who presented the Oath of Office to her son, Council member Devin Murphy.

Council member Murphy explained he had decided to run for office due to his mother who always taught him they were beings of humanity and they live their truth and help people live their truth.

He ran for office since he wanted to be a part of the City of Pinole’s future and see people that looked like him and his family who should be seen and heard. He was grateful for his mother’s resilience, dedication, love and the authenticity she brought daily to herself and to her family and because of that he wanted her to present the Oath of Office. He also presented her flowers since she meant so much to him, with this moment about her, since she had pushed him to be here.

City Clerk Bell presented the Oath of Office to newly reelected Council member Maureen Toms.

C. Selection of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heather Bell)
City Clerk Bell presented the staff report dated December 17, 2024, and recommended the City Council approve a resolution appointing Cameron Sasai as Mayor and Anthony Tave as Mayor Pro Tem per the current Mayoral rotation list.

Council member Murphy commented it was an honor to have the audience present in the Council Chambers, noting the City Council took this journey seriously. Council members have a vision to ensure Pinole was a gold standard that continued to grow and produce. The City Council has done a tremendous amount of work to acknowledge shared history and the vision of what it looks like for the City to become a City for everyone. It was an honor to work together as a Council to bring in new opportunities and with this diversity bring in new traditions.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Council member Murphy looked forward to supporting the new leadership and continuing to make strides in the City’s financial security and ensuring sustainability for future generations. Past years have been about progress, accountability, transparency and inclusion to build a better Pinole. He thanked the public for its trust, collaboration and vision and the City Council for its leadership. He was pleased to offer the motion to move the staff recommendation.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
ACTION: Motion by Council member Murphy/Mayor Toms to adopt a resolution appointing Camerson Sasai as Mayor and Anthony Tave as Mayor Pro Tem per the current rotation list.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Toms, Sasai, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
D. Administer Oaths to Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem
Assemblymember Anamarie Avila Farias presented the Oath of Office to Mayor Pro Tem Anthony Tave and she congratulated him on his leadership, expertise and community engagement. She looked forward to working with the Mayor Pro Tem and his colleagues.

Mayor Pro Tem Tave was excited and honored to take on the role of Mayor Pro Tem and he took the opportunity to thank those who have supported and guided him along the way, including community members, former Council members and City staff some of whom were present in the audience. He looked forward to listening to one another, engaging in meaningful debate and making decisions together for the betterment of the community.

Mayor Pro Tem Tave was honored to serve the citizens of Pinole, promised to keep shared values at the forefront of every discussion to ensure transparency and encouraged residents to reach out to City staff or the City Council with any concerns whether through email or a telephone call, with the City Council to strive to provide answers as needed when they can. He suggested Pinole was at a pivotal moment in its history, with a clear vision in the General Plan, but with challenges facing the City many of which have been topics of discussion for years. He looked forward to fostering economic growth, strengthening partnerships with the business community and local organizations and was ready to move forward on initiatives that once seemed out of reach.

In addition to these efforts, Mayor Pro Tem Tave was committed to ensure Pinole remained a vital part of regional conversations regarding resources and allocation of those resources. By working collaboratively with neighboring cities and regional leaders, they could continue to advocate for the needs of the community and he was confident together they could build a thriving, connected and forward-looking Pinole.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Mayor Pro Tem Tave thanked his wife and children for their understanding and support for his role on the City Council which takes time away from family and recognized their patience during this time with that patience and encouragement meaning everything. He also was grateful to Assemblymember Avila Farias, and thanked her for her support and mentorship and thanked a number of former City of Pinole Mayors for their leadership and contributions along with other respected members of the community he thanked all by name.

Kyle Sasai, brother to Cameron Sasai, presented the Oath of Office to Mayor Sasai, and acknowledged what this oath meant to the City of Pinole and the community. He highlighted his family history, with his brother the second Japanese-American Mayor in the City of Pinole, the first Filipino Mayor in the City of Pinole, the youngest Mayor in the City of Pinole and youngest Mayor across the United States. He asked everyone to take part in the Unity Clap, which originated with the United Farm Workers, comprised of Latino and Filipino laborers who had language barriers and closed their meetings in this way without needing words.

E. Transfer of Gavel and Comments by the New Mayor
Mayor Toms transferred the gavel to new Mayor Sasai.

Mayor Sasai thanked God for this moment and for always providing. He commented earlier in the year he had a bad car accident and was appreciative to be alive and not severely injured. He thanked his extended family present in the Council Chambers and his friends who traveled a long way to be present for this special moment. Having been elected to the City Council in 2022, his mother had provided the Oath of Office and his father later provided the Oath when he had been sworn in as Mayor Pro Tem. Having his brother provide the Oath as Mayor was an honor.

Mayor Sasai recognized the support of his brother who had been present when he changed tact from pre-med to public service and advocacy and who reminded him of the people whose shoulders he stands on, including his grandparents who worked in the fields picking vegetables day and night, had dreams in life but sacrificed so much to allow him to live his dream and serve his community. He did not have a policy advisor or Chief of Staff, but his brother had always been there when he had to make tough decisions and who encouraged him to do the right thing. It was an honor to have him swear him in as Mayor.

Mayor Sasai acknowledged they were going into four years of a new Presidential Administration and as the Mayor of the City of Pinole, he suggested it was okay to feel worried and concerned, but they could and should focus on what they could control, and what was happening locally and at the state level and where the community comes into play. He urged continued engagement at Council meetings and extending kindness to people they may disagree with politically.

Regardless of immigration status, gender or sexual orientation, everyone was welcome in Pinole and the City would fight to ensure everyone was equally protected in the community, loved ones were safe and civil rights upheld and everyone had a sense of belonging.

Mayor Sasai commented when elected he had been encouraged to listen and learn in the first term and in the second term start to push. When elected he had established and funded a paid program for high school students to intern the Mayor and the City Council, obtain valuable skills, and a closer look at City government.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

The City Council tackled the housing crisis with the adoption of a Certified Housing Element, the City of Pinole was given a prohousing designation by the state, along with breaking ground on hundreds of units including housing for seniors and veterans. The City Council also adopted the CAAP and an ordinance prohibiting single use plastics.

Mayor Sasai stated he had championed the Bay Area’s first ever ban on new gas stations pushing towards climate goals, protecting children, seniors and vulnerable groups against air pollution and climate change. The City Council took action on public safety by passing one of the state’s strictest gun safety and storage regulations, reducing aggressive gun violence in the City and for those at risk of hate crimes expanded state resources with information posted in all public facilities in the City and on every bus in the WestCAT transit system.

Mayor Sasai emphasized he would work to continue that progress, with top of mind for the next year, the deferred maintenance on roads and sewers. With the passage of Measure I, it was hoped the City could invest in its roads as soon as humanly possible and ensure investments in pedestrian safety. Downtown revitalization had been discussed for some time and he would like to see a hard push for aesthetic improvements in the downtown, support of local businesses and filling of vacant sites with the possibilities for retail or housing, and ensure they address racial and economic justice, address inequities in every issue area which was paramount of importance and confront the hard issues and discuss them and have the community involved in that process which was how they could move the community forward.

Mayor Sasai stated he had the benefit of being born and raised in the City of Pinole. He had seen the way the community had evolved and changed and where it remained stagnant. He would like to address long term growth and also address the issues that impacts residents the most. He suggested the next year would be great, this was a historic moment for the entire community and it was more than a symbol of progress. He wanted to be a Mayor that was laser focused on substantive issues and progress on those issues. While Council members have not always been in agreement, they had more in common that not. He looked forward to working hard in 2025 and alongside everyone every step of the way to get the work done.

11. BRIEF RECESS FOR RECEPTION
The City Council took a recess at 6:39 p.m. for a brief reception and reconvened at 7:16 p.m. with all Council members present.

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Nominate Council Members to Serve on Boards and Subcommittees Action:

Discuss and Provide Direction (Heather Bell)
City Clerk Bell presented the staff report dated December 17, 2024, and recommended the City Council nominate Council members to serve as City representatives on specific boards and subcommittees in 2025. The City Council would have the opportunity to approve the nominations at the next City Council meeting on January 21, 2025.

In response to the Mayor, City Clerk Bell confirmed the Ad-Hoc Subcommittees for the City Seal and Municipal Code Update were no longer active with both to be removed from the final version of the appointment list.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

The following Board and Subcommittee Appointments were discussed and offered for 2025:

Joint Powers Authorities and other Interagency Regulatory Bodies of which the City is a Member Delegate/Primary Alternate
Association of Bay Area Murphy Martinez-Rubin
Governments (ABAG)
Marin Clean Energy (MCE) Murphy Toms
Pinole/Hercules Wastewater Tave/Murphy Martinez-Rubin
Subcommittee
West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Tave Murphy
Management Authority
(WCCIWMA, “RecycleMore”)
West Contra Costa Transportation Sasai Tave
Advisory Committee (WCCTAC)
Mayor Sasai would like to serve as the Delegate for WCCTAC, Mayor Pro Tem Tave was willing to serve as Alternate, Commissioner Toms was interested in serving as the Delegate given her availability was changing, she had attended the meetings for the past 20 years as a staff member and was interested in serving and the City has had no representative the last three meetings.

Mayor Pro Tem Tave noted that WCCTAC had experienced difficulties reaching a quorum.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Toms to appoint Council member Toms as the Delegate to the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC).

Vote: Failed 2-3
Ayes: Toms, Martinez-Rubin
Noes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council member Murphy/Mayor Pro Tem Tave to appoint Mayor Sasai as the Delegate and Mayor Pro Tem Tave as the Alternate to the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC).

Vote: Passed 3-2
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy
Noes: Toms, Martinez-Rubin
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Western Contra Costa Transit Sasai/Martinez-Rubin Murphy Authority (“WestCAT”)

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Green Empowerment Zone Board of Murphy Toms
Directors*
*Meetings are on the second Friday bi-monthly
Voluntary Interagency Collaboration Bodies of which the City is a Member Bayfront Chamber of Commerce Toms
Contra Costa Mayors Conference Sasai Tave
East Bay Division League of Sasai Tave
California Cities
West County Mayors and Sasai Tave
Supervisors Association
Subcommittees of the Pinole City Council
Finance Subcommittee Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem & City Treasurer Committee on Memorials Sasai/Murphy
Council member Murphy expressed interest serving on the Committee for Memorials.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to appoint Mayor Sasai and Council member Martinez-Rubin to the Committee on Memorials.

Vote: Failed 2-3
Ayes: Toms, Martinez-Rubin
Noes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy
Abstain: None

Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Council members Murphy/Mayor Sasai to appoint Mayor Sasai and Council member Murphy to the Committee on Memorials.

Vote: Passed 3-2
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy
Noes: Toms, Martinez-Rubin
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Municipal Code Ad-Hoc Subcommittee*
*To be removed from the list as no longer active
Planning Commission Interview Ad-Hoc Toms/Martinez-Rubin Subcommittee
TAPS & Community Services Commission Tave/Martinez-Rubin Interview Ad-Hoc Subcommittee

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

Participants in Formation Process of East Bay Toms/Tave Wildfire Prevention and Vegetation Management
Joint Powers Authority
Technology and Communication Murphy/Tave
Subcommittee
Mayor Pro Tem Tave offered a motion, seconded by Council member Murphy to remove the Technology and Communication Subcommittee from the List of Council Appointments to Boards and Subcommittees. The subcommittee had not met for some time, with some supplemental staff for that effort and there had been a discussion about other technology components and therefore he suggested this was something that could be picked up later in the year, if needed.

Council member Murphy agreed with the recommendation since the City now had a Public Information Officer (PIO), completed its Communication and Public Engagement Plan and Information Technology (IT) Plan with excellent work by staff to implement those items and he commended the work of the Assistant to the City Manager in that effort.

Mayor Pro Tem Tave recalled there had been an issue with the usage of PCTV, and there had been some political usage where PCTV was to be public access and he was uncertain whether that had been resolved.

Council member Murphy noted that policy had been updated.

Council member Martinez-Rubin inquired of the policy.

Mayor Pro Tem Tave again recalled a question on the usage of PCTV and there were some components that he was unsure had been resolved, but some edits were to be made to that policy to be brought back, which was something staff could check on.

City Manager Young expressed the willingness to look into the issue and get back to the City Council.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Tave/Murphy to remove the Technology and Communication Subcommittee from the List of Council Appointments to Boards and Subcommittees to be revisited, if needed.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Ad-Hoc Downtown Pedestrian Improvements Martinez-Rubin/Toms Subcommittee
City Clerk Bell advised the list would be cleaned up with the revisions to be brought back on the Consent Calendar for final approval at the January 21, 2025 City Council meeting.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – December 17, 2024

13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Only open to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to be Heard, Agenda Item 6.

Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Rafael Menis, reported the rate of COVID-19 had increased sharply over the past week, identified the statistics, the highest it had been since early October and urged people to be aware the rate was rising and would likely continue to rise based on past experience and taking precautions such as getting vaccinated, booster shots and wearing masks in indoor settings continued to be advisable.

Mr. Menis added the Republic of South Korea managed to impeach its President thanks to the courage of several members of the People Power Party (PPP). A small portion of the party had been willing to vote for impeachment even after the President refused to resign and do anything to make the situation more stable and those members had been willing to stand up and uphold their oaths and to do what was necessary even though they would undoubtedly face backlash.

He emphasized the importance of loyalty to the community as a whole and the constitution, as reflected by the Oath Council members took this evening. He was pleased the City Council requested future agenda items which show dedication to those things given the future potential challenges they may face as a nation and they had to be ready to confront those challenges.

14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of January 21, 2025 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

At 7:40 p.m., Mayor Sasai adjourned the meeting to the Regular City Council Meeting of January 21, 2025 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.C.

DATE: JANUARY 21, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: LILLY WHALEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON CITY OF PINOLE'S TIMELY COMPLIANCE WITH ASSEMBLY BILL 1332 (AB 1332) – PREAPPROVAL PROGRAM FOR ACCESSORY

DWELLING UNIT (ADU) PLANS

RECOMMENDATION
No action required; Staff recommends the Council receive and file this report

BACKGROUND
Assembly Bill 1332 (AB 1332) requires by January 1, 2025 local governments establish a process for preapproving Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) plans. This legislation aims to streamline the ADU permitting process, reduce development barriers, and increase housing opportunities across California. Under AB 1332, individuals can submit ADU plans for preapproval, which, once approved, are made available to the public for use in developing compliant ADUs.

Preapproved plans help homeowners save time and money by providing ready-to-use designs that meet both state and local standards, thereby promoting efficient housing development.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
State Requirements
Under AB 1332, local governments must:

1. Develop a Submission Process: Allow individuals to submit ADU plans for preapproval.

2. Review submitted ADU plans for Compliance: Ensure submitted plans align with the current California Building Code and local zoning ordinances.

3. Make Plans Publicly Accessible: Publish approved plans on the city’s website, including a contact point for users to acquire or adapt the plans.

Pinole's Timely Compliance
As of December 2024 the City of Pinole has implemented the Preapproved ADU Plans Program to comply with AB 1332. This program is designed to streamline ADU development while ensuring adherence to state and local requirements.

Key elements of the program, as detailed on the City's website include:

• Submission Process:
o Individuals, including architects, designers, and professionals, can submit detached ADU plans for preapproval.
o Plan sets must include floor plans, elevations, roof plans, electrical plans, and structural details, all compiled into a single PDF.
o Plans must comply with the current California Building Code and City of Pinole ADU Development Standards.
• Review and Approval:
o The City reviews submissions for compliance with state and local requirements within 60 days.
o Feedback is provided for revisions as needed until plans meet all standards. • Public Access:
o Approved plans are listed on the City’s website with watermarked renderings and designer contact information.
o Homeowners can select preapproved plans to fast-track their ADU projects, saving time and reducing costs.
• Supporting Homeowners:
o The program eliminates one of the first major hurdles in ADU development:
creating compliant plan sets.
o By providing preapproved designs, the City encourages accessible, affordable housing development.

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of this program is limited to staff time required to develop, implement, and promote it. Assembly Bill 1332 (AB 1332) does not provide State reimbursement for compliance; instead, local agencies are expected to manage program costs within existing budgets. To offset these costs, the bill authorizes local agencies to charge applicants fees equivalent to those for standard ADU permitting processes. The City of Pinole will establish a fee structure designed to recover the costs associated with staff time for processing preapproved ADU plan applications under this program.

ATTACHMENTS
None

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.D.

DATE: JANUARY 21, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: LILLY WHALEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

KAPIL AMIN, SUSTAINABILITY PROJECT MANAGER
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $7,500 FROM MARIN CLEAN

ENERGY (MCE) FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY

PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution (Attachment A) that accepts $7,500 from Marin Clean Energy (MCE) for the implementation of a Community Partnership Program (Attachment B- proposal, Attachment C-work plan)

BACKGROUND
In August 2024, Pinole adopted its inaugural Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Currently, 46% of Pinole's greenhouse gas emissions come from fossil fuel use in buildings, and 49% come from transportation. The CAAP includes key measures to reduce these emissions:
• Electrify existing residential buildings to cut natural gas use by 26% by 2030 and phase out entirely by 2045.
• Require 100% electrification of new buildings starting in 2024. • Increase zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption to 33% by 2030 and 100% by 2045. • Expand local renewable energy generation and storage. • Develop a green workforce program to create high-quality jobs in climate-related industries.

On September 30, 2024, MCE issued a request for proposals for its Community Partnership Programs to support outreach on environmental and cost-saving initiatives. Recognizing alignment between Pinole's CAAP and MCE's goals, the City applied and was awarded $7,500 in October 2024 to support community engagement efforts.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The MCE Community Partnership Program workplan summary as shown in Table 1 will mutually benefit both CAAP and MCE goals. A significant portion of the award will be utilized to develop a one-stop energy-efficiency express permitting system integrated with MCE programs to accelerate and incentivize participation. The workplan will commence in February with a completion goal of one year, however, MCE is flexible.

Table 1: MCE Community Partnership Program workplan summary Pinole CAAP
measure/action
MCE program spotlight Outreach strategy
Sustain and support the
Pinole Energy Enhancement
Program
• Receive free home
energy assessment
and upgrades
• Receive rebates for
common area in-unit
energy and watersavings upgrades
• Contact multifamily
property owners to take
advantage of the Pinole
Energy Enhancement
Rebate program which
is tied to MCE program
rebates
• One-stop energyefficiency express
permitting development
• Integration with
relevant CAAP efforts
Electrify existing residential
buildings to reduce natural
gas consumption 26% by
2030 and 100% by 2045
• Get cash for heat
pump water heater
upgrades
• Free energy
assessment for your
small business
• Save with bill
discounts and
payment assistance
• Take advantage of
free coaching to
reduce operational
costs
• Work with an energy
coach for free to lower
energy costs
• Receive rebates for
common area in-unit
energy and watersavings upgrades
• Jumpstart your career
with paid on-the-job
training
• Make impactful
energy upgrades for
your small and
medium-sized
business
• Earn money by
reducing or shifting
• One-stop energyefficiency express
permitting development
• Program flyers at City
Hall’s Building counter
for contractors
• Train permitting staff
with MCE programs for
developer, contractors
and residents
• Work with Chamber of
Commerce to connect
with small businesses
• Increase compliance of
reach code with
education on rebates
• Integration with
relevant CAAP efforts

energy use
Electrify 100% of new
construction in the City in
2024
• Save more with
MCE’s Bill Credit
• Work with an energy
coach for free to lower
energy costs
• Receive rebates for
common area in-unit
energy and watersavings upgrades
• Jumpstart your career
with paid on-the-job
training
• Enlist support of CAAP
partners such as
Contra Costa College
to promote green
workforce development
• One-stop energyefficiency express
permitting development
• Integration with
relevant efforts
Increase passenger ZEV use
and adoption to 33% by
2030 and 100% by 2045
• Get EV charging
rebates and project
support
• Explore EV rates
• Save on an EV at
participating
dealerships
• Manage home EV
charging from your
smartphone
• Educate multifamily
property owners of
Calgreen requirements
• Educate permitting staff
of available rebates to
developers,
contractors, and
residents
Increase generation and
storage of local communityscale renewable energy
• Use your property for
a small-scale
renewable energy
project
• Get credit for excess
solar energy
• Get credit for solar
storage
• Contact multifamily
property owners, local
contractors, developers
• Integration with any
existing CAAP efforts
Create a green workforce
development program for
climate industries with highroad jobs
• Get cash and support
to grow your business
• Jumpstart your career
with paid on-the-job
training
• Community event at
Contra Costa College
• Integration with
relevant CAAP efforts
• Flyers at Building
counter at City Hall for
contractors, developers
• Educate permitting staff
on sharing programs
with contractors,
developers

FISCAL IMPACT
Acceptance of this grant will have a positive fiscal impact by providing $7,500 in funding to support progress toward the City’s building energy and transportation goals outlined in the CAAP.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Pinole Proposal
C. Final Workplan

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AUTHORIZING RECEIPT OF $7,500 FROM MARIN CLEAN ENERGY FOR THE MCE

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER

TO ENTER INTO, EXECUTE AND DELIVER A STANDARD AGREEMENT FOR

RECEIPT OF MCE FUNDS
WHEREAS, in August 2024 the City of Pinole adopted its inaugural Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 in alignment with AB 1279; and
WHEREAS, 46% and 49% of Pinole’s community greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) are from building energy and transportation, respectively; and WHEREAS, on September 30, 2024, Marin Clean Energy released a request for proposals for the MCE Community Partnership Program which aligned with Pinole’s CAAP projects; and
WHEREAS, on November 27, 2024, MCE announced Pinole as one of the selected bids; and
WHEREAS, the City’s adopted Grants Management Policy and Procedures requires the City Council to authorize the acceptance of all grants.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole resolves as follows:

SECTION 1: The City of Pinole does hereby accept the MCE Community Partnership Program funds in the amount of $7,500 for the City’s Proposal (Exhibit A, as incorporated herein) and Workplan (Exhibit B, as incorporated herein); and SECTION 2: The City Manager is authorized and directed to enter into, execute, and deliver a standard agreement for receipt of funding in the amount of $7,500 and any and all other documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to evidence and secure the MCE funds, the City’s obligations related thereto, and all amendments thereto.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 21st day of January, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 21st day of January, 2025.
___________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk

October 21, 2024
Marin Clean Energy
1125 Tamalpais Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
2300 Clayton Road, Suite 1150, Concord CA
Dear Marin Clean Energy,
The City of Pinole is enthused to submit a proposal for the MCE Community Partnership Program. Pinole is proud to be powered by MCE’s community choice energy since April 2018. The City would be ecstatic to fortify this partnership in order to advance our respective goals and achieve our ultimate, shared goal of sustainable and resilient communities. Pinole is the perfect partner to carry out the RFP’s scope of work due to our aligning visions, trailblazing drive, and honed expertise. MCE and Pinole understand the urgency of proactive response to the detrimental and grave impacts of climate change. Pinole is the first jurisdiction in Contra Costa County to adopt an urgency ordinance to ban expansion of new construction of gas stations with plans to adopt a permanent ban.

Pinole understands the dire need to shift the direction towards clean energy and stymie fossil fuel energy which plagues the environment and health of current and future generations. Pinole launched the Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate (PEER) pilot program which layers on MCE multifamily program in January 2024 to encourage and incentivize increased energy-efficiency and gas-free appliances.

On October 19th 2021, City Council adopted a resolution that declared a Climate Emergency.

This spurred the development of the City’s inaugural Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, adopted August 2024. Pinole conducted extensive outreach and engagement, an almost two-year process, with the community, public agencies, community partners, and various other stakeholders to ensure the CAAP is actionable and implementable. Outreach took shape in surveys, workshops, stakeholder meetings, campaign and media development, pop-ups, community events and more. Like MCE, Pinole strongly upholds equity which is why it is listed as a climate policy pillar in our CAAP. The City is grateful for MCE being integral in the CAAP’s development as well as their presence at our very first CAAP workshop. Additionally, Pinole was pleased to secure MCE as a CAAP partner to help carry out actions in the CAAP. A key piece of the CAAP is climate adaptation and so the City was happy to provide MCE with a MOU to expand MCE’s virtual power plant pilot and is excited to partner on this vital movement.

With 46% of Pinole’s greenhouse gas emissions attributed to natural gas in buildings and 49% due to gaspowered vehicles, MCE is a vital partner to bring Pinole to carbon neutrality. This opportunity to strengthen our collaboration will have an everlasting impact and materialize the change we envision in our communities.

Pinole’s versatile dissemination channels and communications strategies will ensure the goal of this RFP is executed impeccably. The City launched a Plastic Wise Pinole campaign to conduct remarkable community engagement and outreach, meeting one on one with all food businesses. Surveys were offered in Spanish, traditional Chinese, and Tagalog. The campaign led to successfully passing an equitable ordinance. For Pinole’s developing Active Transportation Plan, the City was able to harness its new engagement tool, PublicInput, which streamlines and simplifies outreach to the community and feedback solicitation and integration. Additionally, Pinole recently underwent a significant branding revamp and has launched a new website equipped with functions to easily engage and communicate information. With expert staff and seasoned experience in communicating, educating, developing engaging workshops, planning community events and more, the City of Pinole possesses the passion, values, knowledge and skills to exceed the expectations of the MCE Community Partnership Program.

Sincerely,
City of Pinole Team

Scope of Work
The City’s strategy to support MCE’s mission will be tied to our Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, which greatly relies on highlighting MCE’s programs as vehicles to these goals.

Pinole CAAP measure/action MCE program highlight Strategy/Tactic Sustain and support the
Pinole Energy
Enhancement Program
• Receive free home
energy assessment
and upgrades
• Receive rebates for
common area in-unit
energy and watersavings upgrades
• Leverage and
advocating existing
rebate programs via
community outreach
events and directly
contacting MF property
owners will increase
the Pinole community
to take advantage of
the Pinole Energy
Enhancement Rebate
program
• The PEER program is
tied with MCE MF
rebates and will help
sustain both programs
• Integration with
relevant CAAP efforts
Electrify existing
residential buildings to
reduce natural gas
consumption 26% by 2030
and 100% by 2045
• Get cash for heat
pump water heater
upgrades
• Free energy
assessment for your
small business
• Save with bill
discounts and
payment assistance
• Take advantage of
free coaching to
reduce operational
costs
• Work with an energy
coach for free to lower
energy costs
• Receive rebates for
common area in-unit
energy and watersavings upgrades
• Jumpstart your career
with paid on-the-job
training
• Program flyers at City
Hall’s Building counter
for contractors
• Train permitting staff
with MCE programs for
developer, contractors
and residents
• Work with Chamber of
Commerce to connect
with small businesses
• Increase compliance of
reach code with
education on rebates
• Integration with
relevant CAAP efforts

• Make impactful
energy upgrades for
your small and
medium-sized
business
• Earn money by
reducing or shifting
energy use
Electrify 100% of new
construction in the City in
2024
• Save more with
MCE’s Bill Credit
• Work with an energy
coach for free to lower
energy costs
• Receive rebates for
common area in-unit
energy and watersavings upgrades
• Jumpstart your career
with paid on-the-job
training
• Enlist support of CAAP
partners such as
Contra Costa College
to promote green
workforce development
• Integration with
relevant efforts
Increase passenger ZEV
use and adoption to 33%
by 2030 and 100% by 2045
• Get EV charging
rebates and project
support
• Explore EV rates
• Save on an EV at
participating
dealerships
• Manage home EV
charging from your
smartphone
• Educate multifamily
property owners of
Calgreen requirements
• Educate permitting staff
of available rebates to
developers,
contractors, and
residents
Increase generation and
storage of local
community-scale
renewable energy
• Use your property for
a small-scale
renewable energy
project
• Get credit for excess
solar energy
• Get credit for solar
storage
• Integration with any
existing CAAP efforts
Create a green workforce
development program for
climate industries with
high-road jobs
• Get cash and support
to grow your business
• Jumpstart your career
with paid on-the-job
training
• Community event at
Contra Costa College
• Integration with
relevant CAAP efforts
• Flyers at Building
counter at City Hall for
contractors, developers
• Educate permitting staff
on sharing programs

with contractors,
developers
For businesses MCE programs, The City will works with the Chamber of Commerce which can help with outreach and engagement.

For multifamily MCE programs, the City will directly connect with multifamily property owners and managers. This can take form in in-person meetings, letters, emails, phone calls etc. This form of outreach to multifamily property owners and managers has already began through the Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate Program and CAAP development. Pinole has been awarded ProHousing designation and currently has 2 multifamily buildings near completion.

For local contractor/developer MCE programs, flyers will be placed at the Building permit counter and permitting staff will be educated on relevant MCE programs. A community event will also be held at Contra Costa College, who is a CAAP partner for green workforce development.

Before every event/educational communication, Pinole will work closely with MCE’s internal outreach team to ensure all information is accurate and up to date as well as seek approval of event agenda and plan. The City’s new website features can house interest forms by program, if needed. If MCE flyers will not be provided for the event, materials will be sent to MCE team for approval. All materials will follow the City’s procurement policy which requires union printing, eco-friendly materials ( paper, inks, swag, banners). Language translated materials will also be provided at outreach events. An outreach report will be provided to document data on community reached, interest list with contact information, type of event hosted, success and lessons learned, etc. If surveys are fitting during outreach, survey development, outreach and results will be provided in close coordination with MCE internal outreach team.

Equity will be a major focus of this outreach campaign. The City has worked with Cool the Earth, a CAAP partner, and has discussed community dinners in disadvantaged communities to educate on clean transportation. The City’s collaboration with Kitchen@812, a food business incubator, fosters small food businesses. Pinole’s single-use plastics ordinance keeps equity for small businesses at its forefront. Equity is a climate policy pillar of our CAAP as climate change disproportionately impacts disadvantaged communities, so it is vital to level this imbalance.

Budget (included as separate attachment)
City of Pinole will cover any cost over $7,500
Timeline
Educate permitting staff: 03/2025-05/2025
Tabling at Contra Costa College: 06/2025
Contact real estate agencies, multifamily owners/managers, contractors, etc.: 04/2025- 07/2025

Statement of Qualifications

Kapil Amin M.L.A, Sustainability Project Manager, received his Master’s in Sustainability from Harvard Extension. Kapil was the project lead for the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. For the CAAP he was the primary organizer and developer of workshops, pop-ups, social media content, subscribers’ lists, surveys, stakeholder meetings, and more. Kapil has completed similar scopes of work for the City’s single-use plastics campaign, Plastic Wise Pinole, and developing Active Transportation Plan. He is also one of the primary organizers of the City’s annual Earth Walk. Kapil spearheads all measures and actions in the CAAP.

Lilly Whalen, MCRP, Community Development Director, oversees Code Enforcement, Sustainability, Economic Development, Planning, Building, Affordable Housing, and Redevelopment. Lilly spearheaded transformation of the City’s previous, archaic permitting system to an online permitting system cutting permit issuance time from 6-8 weeks to 2- 3 days through availability of express permits. She has also launched Pinole Perks to drive the local economy and support small, local businesses. Lilly was integral in designing and developing outreach and engagement campaigns for the CAAP and Plastic Wise Pinole.

Fiona Epps, Public Information Officer, is an expert in communications.

Fiona has completely revamped the City’s branding, website, and communication strategies. She has equipped the City with streamlined tools such as Pinole Speaks and a mobile app to simplify notifying and soliciting community feedback. Fiona is in charge of releasing all City communications.

Sanjay Mishra, P.E., T.E, Public Works Director, oversees the City’s capital improvement projects, municipal building maintenance/upgrades, and more. His expertise with zero-emission vehicles, charging infrastructure, microgrids, battery storage, clean energy, etc. will come in handy for outreach and engagement development, design and support.

Fabiola Guillen, Capital Improvements/Environmental Programs Manager, manages capital improvement projects in Pinole which include charging infrastructure and green buildings. Her knowledge and skills in clean energy will be key in outreach and engagement development, design, and support.

References

1. Alex Gomez
Business Development Center, Kitchen@812
510-932-1844
[email protected]

2. Ann Moriarty
Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed
510-672-4567
[email protected]

3. Annika Osborn, Director of Programs and Community Development Cool the Earth

[email protected]
Contract Terms Revisions
Licensing. Removal of language at Section 5.3 subsection (c) which requires the City to obtain a business license to conduct business in California. As a municipal corporation, the City is not obligated to obtain a state license to conduct business in California. However, the City can agree to the remaining terms that it will obtain and maintain any necessary permits, licenses, certificates etc. to perform the services under the agreement.

Insurance. The City of Pinole is self-insured as authorized by California Government Code § 11007.8. The City should request that MCE accept self-insurance in lieu of the policies required at Section 6.0. Additionally, request that MCE waive all rights of subrogation against the City of Pinole for loss arising from work performed under the agreement. See proposed language at Section 6.

Jurisdiction. Section 16 provides that jurisdiction and venue shall be in the State of California, County of Marin. The City should request Contra Costa County.

Thank You!

Outreach Action # of People Reached How # People Reached Will be Measured
# Hours for Each Team
Member (list each)
Hourly Rate for Each Team
Member* Total Staff Costs Additional Costs(description) Additional Costs ($) Cost Per Activity Contacting real estate agencies,
multifamily property owners and
managers, local contractors,
developers, Chamber of
Commerce
1,000+
list of orgs reached 5 $150.00 $750.00
30 $80.00 $2,400.00
$0.00 $3,150.00
Workforce development tabling at
Contra Costa College 500+
historic attendance 2 $150.00 $300.00
footage of event 8 $80.00 $640.00
sign-in sheet $0.00 $940.00
One-stop energy-efficiency
express permitting integrated with
MCE rebates and programs &
Educating permitting staff for
programs for local
contractors/developers/residents
1000+
avg number of City Hall
visitors 21 $80.00 $1,680.00
10 $120.00 $1,200.00
4 $150.00 $600.00 $3,480.00
TOTALS 0 $7,570.00 $0.00 $7,570.00
*Staff rates should include wages, benefits, payroll taxes, and direct HR costs only. Any additional overhead should be budgeted in a separate line item. Rates for volunteers can be listed as $0.

Please expand, add, or delete rows and format as needed.

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.E.

DATE: JANUARY 21, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: FABY GUILLEN, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM

MANAGER
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SECOND TASK ORDER TO AMEND THE ONCALL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. FOR SERVICES RELATED TO THE PINON TRUNK SEWER CAPACITY PHASE 2 PROJECT.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a second task order to amend the on-call Consulting Services Agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. dated November 20, 2022 (the “Agreement”) for onsite inspection and construction management services associated with the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 Project, in an amount not to exceed $271,361 for a total contract amount of $315,361.

BACKGROUND
On June 4, 2024, City Council awarded the construction contract for the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 Project to K.J. Woods Construction, Inc.

On September 16, 2024, staff requested proposals from three on call consultants. Staff received two proposals from qualified consultants. Proposals were evaluated by staff based on criteria such as previous experience with similar projects, qualified personnel, and familiarity with City procedures and project delivery.

The two firms were interviewed by panel members consisting of City staff. The panel members found Coastland as the most qualified consultant for this project. After successful negotiations, Coastland submitted a fee proposal to perform inspection and construction management services, for a sum of $315,361.

The City entered into an on-call Consulting Services Agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. on November 20, 2022.

In October 2024, staff issued a first task order for $44,000 to secure timely inspection and construction management services, and to extend the term of the original agreement to December 31, 2025.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS

In September 2024, the City received a proposal from Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. (Attachment B) in the amount of $315,361 to provide the additional scope of services as requested by staff.

Staff recommends approval of a second task order to amend the Consulting Services Agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. to increase the original amount of the Agreement by $271,361 to a total not to exceed amount of $315,361.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are funds available in the adopted CIP budget for the SS2401 Project.

Final Proposed CIP FY2024-2028

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Proposal-Coastland -Pinon Phase 2

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPRVING AND AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO AMEND THE ON-CALL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. FOR SERVICES RELATED TO THE PINON TRUNK SEWER CAPACITY PHASE 2 PROJECT.

WHEREAS on June 4, 2024, City Council awarded the construction contract for the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 Project to K.J. Woods Construction, Inc.; and WHEREAS the City needed construction management and inspection services for the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2; and
WHEREAS on September 16, 2024, staff requested proposals from three on call consultants, and received and evaluated two proposals from qualified consultants based on criteria such as previous experience with similar projects, qualified personnel, and familiarity with City procedures and project delivery; and WHEREAS the two firms were interviewed by panel members consisting of City staff; and
WHEREAS the members of the panel found Coastland as the most qualified consultant for this project; and
WHEREAS Coastland submitted a fee proposal to perform inspection and construction management services, for a sum of $315,361
WHEREAS the City entered into an on-call Consulting Services Agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. on November 20, 2022.

WHEREAS in October 2024, staff issued a first task order for $44,000 to secure timely inspection and construction management services, and to extend the term of the original agreement to December 31, 2025
WHEREAS the total amount of the on-call consulting services agreement will include a second task order in the amount of $271,361 for a total not to exceed contract amount of $315,361; and
WHEREAS funds for this work are available in the adopted CIP budget for the SS2401 Project; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a second task order to amend the on-call consulting services agreement with Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. for the services related to the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 Project, in the amount requested above.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 21st day of January 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 21st day of January 2025.
___________________________
Heather Bell
City Clerk

Santa Rosa Auburn Pleasant Hill Fairfield
1400 Neotomas Avenue 11641 Blocker Drive, Ste. 170 3478 Buskirk Avenue, Ste. 1000 420 Executive Court North, Ste. G Santa Rosa, CA 95405 Auburn, CA 95603 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Fairfield, CA 94534 Tel: 707.571.8005 Tel: 530.888.9929 Tel: 925.233.5333 Tel: 707.702.1961 www.coastland.dccm.com
September 16, 2024
A. Fabiola Guilllen
Capital Improvement/Environmental Program Manager
City of Pinole
2131 Pear St.

Pinole, CA 94564
Subject: Proposal to Provide Construction Management and Inspection Services for the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Project Phase 2
CIP PROJECT No.: SS2401
Dear Faby:

Coastland | DCCM is pleased to provide you with this letter proposal to provide Construction Management and Inspection services to the City of Pinole for the Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Project Phase 2.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The work will consist of replacing existing sanitary sewer pipelines and installing new pipelines via multiple methods such as open trench, pipe bursting, and pilot tube guided auger boring. Portions of this work will require bypass pumping. Additionally, laterals will be reconnected, manholes replaced, asphalt and concrete replaced, and other restoration performed as necessary. Specific manholes and sections of existing pipeline will be abandoned. Traffic controls will be implemented, and the work will include CCTV inspections.

Work shall be completed within 180 working days. The Engineer’s Estimate for the project is approximately $4,750,000.

SCOPE OF WORK
Coastland | DCCM’s overall approach to performing Construction Management and Inspection focuses on teaming with City forces to produce a high-quality, cost-effective project. Our Construction Manager and Inspector will keep the City informed regarding costs, changes, public relations, and construction progress.

We will coordinate closely with the City and the property owners for the entire project duration. From the onset of the project, we will establish the lines of communication and decision-making roles with all project stakeholders. Based on our understanding of the project our scope of services is as follows:

TASK 1 – PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING
Immediately following the Notice to Proceed, our Construction Manager will schedule and administer the pre-construction meeting. During this meeting we will establish lines of communication and decision making roles with all project stakeholders. We will also discuss safety requirements, responsibilities of the project team members, working hours, quality control procedures, submittal requirements, project schedule, change order and potential claim procedures, and safety procedures.

Pinon Sewer Trunk Capacity Phase 2 – CM & Inspection Proposal | Page 2 Coastland | DCCM will be responsible for generating pre-construction meeting invitations including the meeting agenda. Agenda items include lines of communication, public relations, safety, submittals, change procedures, payments, progress schedules, contract time, requests for information, and other applicable items. Coastland | DCCM will prepare and distribute meeting minutes to all parties.

Following the pre-construction meeting, Coastland | DCCM will continue to work with the City team, contractor, and project design team to ensure that all project issues are addressed promptly and that the City’s best interests are considered at all times.

TASK 2 – PRE-CONSTRUCTION SITE VISIT AND DOCUMENTATION
Coastland | DCCM will take pre-construction digital photos of the construction site with special attention given to sensitive areas including any private residences and businesses adjacent to the project.

Documenting the site prior to construction will help mitigate possible disputes between the City, contractor and property owners within or adjacent to the project limits. These photos will be logged and filed with the project files.

TASK 3 – PROJECT START-UP
Coastland | DCCM will assemble project files in accordance with the City’s standard format. Coastland | DCCM utilizes a centralized system for document control to create, store, organize, track, and link all project information. Our digital record-keeping will ensure the constant flow of documentation to a form that quickly and easily identifies trends and critical issues and will help keep the project moving as it helps document the work.

TASK 4 - DAILY FIELD INSPECTIONS AND DOCUMENTATION
A critical aspect of our services is maintaining close communication with City staff to ensure scheduling goals are met. To help maintain close communication, Coastland | DCCM’s inspector will be accessible to the City at all times at the project site and through the use of email and cellular phones. Coastland | DCCM’s on-site inspector will examine all construction activities to ensure that the contract work adheres to the contract documents, City standards and the established schedule.

We will maintain records and provide documentation of the work in the form of daily reports, weekly summary of construction activities, deficiency lists, and progress photographs of construction activities.

Daily reports will describe the contractor’s level of effort, specific work being done, started, or finished, and relevant points raised by the contractor that may require consideration and response. We also document proposed change orders and claims, important conversations, safety issues or accidents, extra work in progress, materials testing performed, information for “as-built” drawings, quantities for progress payments, environmental concerns and hazardous materials.

Coastland | DCCM will provide a digital photo log of construction activities, progress, and areas of concern or interest. The photo log will be compiled on our CMIS (construction management software) web site and will identify the location and date of each photo. The log will be maintained throughout the duration of the project to assure continuity from one week to the next and will be submitted to the City at the close of the project.

Coastland | DCCM will continually review the specifications and plans to ensure the work is of good quality and meets the requirements of the contract documents. Coastland | DCCM will immediately report any deviation from the approved contract documents.

Our inspector will identify actual and potential problems and provide solutions. We will maintain daily documentation and resolve issues by proposing field changes and avoid any delays.

Pinon Sewer Trunk Capacity Phase 2 – CM & Inspection Proposal | Page 3 Our inspector will review the Contractor’s traffic control plan to make certain that access is maintained during construction.

In summary, our Inspector’s responsibilities include:
 Represent the City in ensuring that the terms of the construction contract are followed throughout the term of the project.
 Participate in regular meetings called by the Construction Manager.  Protect the interest of the City.
 Daily inspection of the contractor’s work for conformance to the contract documents, codes, regulations, and City standards.
 Prepare and submit daily inspection reports that document all job site activities.  Serve as a daily contact for the contractor as to performance of the construction.  Respond promptly to City requests.
 Verify construction material quantities.
 Monitor traffic control procedures.
 Distribute notifications to impacted public regarding the status of construction.  Document construction activities with photographs and maintain a photo log.  Respond to calls from the public promptly and log any complaints in a timely manner.  Work overtime as needed to assure presence on site during all construction activities.  Document and maintain complete field files containing construction period correspondences, changes, discussions with contractor, memos, reports, and other pertinent items.

TASK 5 – PROGRESS MEETINGS
Coastland | DCCM will conduct weekly coordination and progress meetings to focus on completed and upcoming work, any construction delays, schedule updates, proposed changes, change orders, contractor’s questions, public relations, safety and other concerns that are identified by a project team member. We will work to foster honest, open communication at these weekly meetings which will help in timely resolution of any disputes and/or potential claims.

TASK 6 – STATUS REPORTS AND DOCUMENTATION
Task 6a – Reports
Complete and accurate record-keeping will be an essential component of this project. We will ensure project documents and certified payroll are complete and correct subcontractors are used. We will keep the City informed and document all construction issues with the following:
 Weekly Statement of Working Days
 Progress Meeting Minutes
 Field Directive Log
 Change order tracking
 Regular phone calls and e-mails
Task 6b – Submittal Management
Coastland | DCCM will coordinate all submittals and monitor the status of the submittals to assure the contractor provides timely response. At the pre-construction conference, we will provide the contractor with a log of all required submittals and due dates. Submittals will be stamped, logged and distributed to the designer for complete review and approval. Submittals will be filed numerically and approved copies will be distributed to the City, project members, and the contractor.

Pinon Sewer Trunk Capacity Phase 2 – CM & Inspection Proposal | Page 4 Task 6c – Requests for Information (RFI)
Coastland | DCCM will receive and log all Requests for Information (RFIs) from the contractor, and forward the RFI to the designer. Coastland | DCCM will track the status of all RFI’s by generating a weekly RFI log that lists the “Ball-in-court” status, description, and if an RFI results in a potential change order.

Task 6d – Change Order Management
In the event that a change order is required, Coastland | DCCM will negotiate the changes with the contractor and prepare documentation. All changes will be approved by the contractor, Coastland | DCCM and the City prior to starting work on the change. With the City’s approval, Coastland | DCCM can negotiate with the contractor to produce the best construction method for the change at the lowest cost. If a change order requires input from the design engineer, our Construction Manager will coordinate with them to ensure it is reviewed. A Change Order Log will be created that will show Change Order number, description, status, approved date, start and completion dates and cost.

TASK 7 – COST AND SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT
Coastland | DCCM will continually review the construction progress and perform field measurements and quantity calculations. Each month, Coastland | DCCM will provide accurate calculations for all work items completed and accepted to provide progress payment recommendations to the City. Coastland | DCCM will review the contractor’s progress pay estimate request and schedule of values to assess if they are reasonable, and will compare this to the field measurements and quantity calculations. We will continually monitor project costs and keep the City informed regularly.

Coastland | DCCM will review the contractor’s construction schedule for accuracy, reasonableness, and will verify that it meets the project schedule, order of work, and contract requirements. Progress schedules will be reviewed weekly to ensure the contractor is meeting the critical dates. If the contractor fails to meet critical dates, it will immediately be brought to his attention and remedies to get back on schedule will be accomplished. Schedule updates may be required once a month or more. We will negotiate any time extensions for the contractor due to change orders, weather, or other delays. Coastland | DCCM will also maintain an as-built progress schedule.

TASK 8 – PUBLIC RELATIONS AND NOTIFICATIONS
Coastland | DCCM will ensure every effort is made to keep residents and businesses informed of construction progress and minimize disruptions due to limited access and excessive noise. Our Construction Manager will proactively meet with property owners prior to and during construction to address any concerns from those affected by the project.

We will monitor traffic control and flagging procedures to ensure construction proceeds smoothly and public impact is minimized. There may be traffic delays during peak traffic periods. Accordingly, we will keep all residents and businesses informed on construction status and impacts through the use of posted notices and notification letters. Our Construction Manager will also make introductions to the affected properties and provide his 24-hour contact phone number as appropriate. Coastland | DCCM will ensure that Contractor provides advanced notice to residents and businesses, as required by the specifications, regarding roadwork and lane closures.

Additionally, our inspector will accurately document pre-construction conditions with a photo log to verify the project area is restored to its original form following construction.

TASK 9 – PROJECT CLOSEOUT
Coastland | DCCM will verify completion of punch list items, issue notice of completion, prepare recommendations for final acceptance of the project, review as-builts for accuracy and completeness,

Pinon Sewer Trunk Capacity Phase 2 – CM & Inspection Proposal | Page 5 prepare and recommend final payment, and transmit all construction documentation to the City. At the completion of the project, we will provide the City with the following:
 All contract files and records (electronic files)
 Journal of photos and CD of digital photos if requested  As-built project schedule

OPTIONAL TASKS
If requested by the City, conflict resolution & claim management can be added under an amendment on a Time & Materials basis.

SCHEDULE
We understand that proper construction management is a priority for the City. The project duration is expected to be 180 working days from the date of the Notice to Proceed.

WORK ESTIMATE
We propose to provide our services on a time-and-materials basis with a not-to-exceed amount. Our proposal is based on a project duration of 180 working days with full-time inspection and part-time construction management as outlined in our work estimate. We propose to provide full-time inspection at 40 hours per week and estimate inspector overtime at 36 hours for typical overrun.

Our proposal also includes factors such as attending meetings, project closeout and vehicle costs. Based on these items, we estimate the not-to-exceed fee to be $315,361. If the contract time extends beyond 180 working days, or the scope or level of services change, our costs may also increase. Similarly, if the contract time is reduced, charges will decrease accordingly.

This estimate has been created to show the overall cost for comprehensive Construction Management and Inspection services on the project. We welcome the opportunity to speak with you regarding the scope of services. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns regarding this estimate.

Coastland | DCCM maintains a current DIR registration number (1000927467, exp. 6/30/2026). We greatly appreciate the opportunity to serve the City Pinole. Please let me know if you have questions.

Sincerely,

COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING, LLP
Dennis Sheil John Wanger
Construction Manager Principal | CEO

Pinon Sewer Trunk Capacity Phase 2 – CM & Inspection Proposal | Page 6 PM/CM Inspector Inspector OT
$200 $185 $278
1 Pre-construction Meeting 3 1 4 $785
2 Site Visit & Documentation 2 2 4 $770
3 Project Start-Up 4 4 800
4 Daily Field Inspections & Documentation 1,440 1,440 $266,400 4a Overtime Inspection 36 36 $10,008
5 Progress Meetings/Other Mtgs 72 36 108 $21,060 Based on 36 weekly meetings 6 Status Reports & Documentation
6b Submittal Management 12 12 $2,400 Based on 25 submittals 6c Requests For Information 10 10 $2,000 Based on 10 RFIs 6d Change Order Management 10 10 $2,000 Based on 5 CCO's 7 Cost and Schedule Management 16 16 $3,200 Based on 8 pay applications 8 Public Relations and Notifications 10 10 $1,850
9 Project Closeout 8 5 13 $2,525
Photographs & video
Vehicle/Equipment expenses $1,563 $1,563
Total Hours 137 1,494 36 1,667
Subtotal $27,400 $276,390 $10,008 $1,563 $315,361
PROJECT TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED $27,400 $276,390 $10,008 $1,563 $315,361 1 Based on 180 working days.
2 Based on full time inspection at 40 hours per week during construction. 36 total hours of overtime have been included for typical overruns. 3 Based on part time Constrtuction Management services. 4 Based on an estimated number of RFI's, change orders and submittals shown above. 5 Based on the assumption that Coastland | DCCM will not be providing compaction/materials/special inspections NOTES: Coastland | DCCM reserves the right to adjust estimated hours should the Contractor schedule additional crews or overtime work.

HOURS AND COST INFORMATION
Direct
Costs
Total
Hours
Total
Costs Comments

CONSTRUCTION PHASE

WORK ESTIMATE
TASK

TASK INFORMATION

CITY OF PINOLE PROPOSAL FOR CM
& INSPECTION SERVICES

PINON TRUNK SEWER CAPACITY PROJECT
PHASE 2

Dennis Sheil
Construction Manager

EDUCATION
Ph.D., Project Management,
Los Angeles University
M.B.A., University of Phoenix
B.S., Business Management,
University of Phoenix
A.A., Construction Technology

PROFESSIONAL

HISTORY
Construction Manager
Coastland | DCCM
2022 - Present
Senior Construction Manager /
Project Manager / Inspector
Anchor Engineering, Inc.
2015 - 2022
Project Manager / Office
Engineer
The Covello Group, Inc.
2002 - 2014
Senior Project Manager
Van-Catlin Construction, Inc.
2000 - 2002
Senior Project Manager
Taylor Communications, Inc.
1999 - 2000
Project Manager
U.S. Air Force
1979 - 1999

CERTIFICATES/

TRAINING
LEED Green Associate
Governor’s Office of Emergency
Services Assessment Evaluator
Contract Construction Inspection

ASSOCIATIONS
American Construction
Inspectors Association
Construction Management
Association of America
American Public Works
Association
Dennis Sheil serves as the Construction Manager for Coastland | DCCM’s Fairfield office. He brings more than 44 years of construction management and inspection experience on capital improvement projects including water and sanitary sewer projects. Dennis is experienced in biddability and constructability review of design and contract documents and has provided skillful management of multiple and complex projects simultaneously.

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of Antioch
 On-Call Construction Inspection FY2022-2023
City of Benicia
 Military West 12-Inch Water Main Replacement
City of Emeryville
 City Engineering - FY2018-2020 CIP Delivery and Inspection Services  2022-2023 Annual Paving Project
 Davenport Minipark
 Annual Street Rehabilitation and Preventative Maintenance  Trash Capture Project
 Powell Street and Marina Lighting Project
 BMR Backbone Utility
Delta Diablo Sanitation District*
 Antioch Recycled Water Project
Dublin San Ramon Services District
 Waterline Replacement Wineberry and Canterbury Neighborhoods  Camp Parks Water Main Project*
 Pump Station 4A & Reservoir 4A*
 Maintenance Buildings Construction*
 Bar Screen and Screening Conveyance System Improvements* Town of Moraga
 2023 On-Call Services
Oro Loma Sanitary District
 Sewer Main Replacement Project*
City of Piedmont
 FY 2023-2024 City Engineering Support
 2022 Sewer Rehabilitation
 2021 Pavement Project
 Encroachment Permits
 Waterline Replacement
 Oakland Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation
 Aquatic Center
 Crown Castle Communications Installation
 Highland Guilford Steps
 EBMUD Wildwood Permit
 Crocker Park Pathway Renovation
 Oakland Avenue Bulb Outs
 Dracona Park ADA Improvements
 Police Dispatch Center
Solano Irrigation District
 Encroachment Permits CM & Inspection
 Chadbourne Lateral
 Chadbourne Pipeline
 Lower Weyand Pipeline
 Upper Weyand Pipeline
 Homestead Phase 2A Backbone
 Lower Lagoon Valley
*Prior to joining Coastland | DCCM

Ibrahim Mcharo
Construction Inspector

EDUCATION
M.S., Mining Survey
Engineering
M.S., Geodetic Engineering
Doctorate of Business
Administration (DBA)

PROFESSIONAL

HISTORY
Construction Inspector
Coastland | DCCM
2022 - Present
Construction Inspector
Psomas
2019 - 2022
Construction Inspector
Anchor CM
2018 - 2019
Construction Inspector
Harris & Associates
2005 - 2018

CERTIFICATES/

TRAINING
QSP Training
Caltrans CALAPA (Super pave)
certificate Caltrans, Certified
Acceptance Tester: Asphalt 375
N., Sampling 125AC, Sampling
125 AGG, 231 Nuclear Soils,
Concrete 533 Kelly Ball,
Concrete Sample 539, Concrete
Cylinder 540
Occupational Safety and Health
Act (OSHA), HAZWOPER -
Levels A, B, C and D
BART Safety Monitor

ASSOCIATIONS
American Concrete Institute
Ibrahim Mcharo has more than 20 years of experience in construction inspection on various types of infrastructure projects, including roadways, sanitary sewer projects, water projects and levees. Ibrahim’s experience with constructing levees and completing levee repairs includes checking the structure of the levee for areas containing potential hazards. He has also been responsible for confirming the contractor implements proposed recommendations to resolve field issues. Ibrahim also has extensive experience in monitoring SWPPP compliance on infrastructure improvement projects.

RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of Benicia
 Military West 12-Inch Water Main Replacement
Burlingame Hills Sewer Maintenance District
 Adeline Dr. and Canyon Rd. Capacity Improvement Project* Dublin San Ramon Sewer District
 Waterline Replacement Wineberry and Canterbury Neighborhoods East Bay Regional Parks District
 Albany Beach Restoration & Public Access Improvements - Phases 2 & 3* City of Emeryville
 General City Engineering
 Davenport Minipark Project
 Annual Street Rehabilitation and Preventative Maintenance Town of Moraga
 Pavement Improvement Program and Storm Damage Repairs* City of Oakley
 Old Town Pipeline Improvement Project – Sanitary Sewer Replacement* City of Piedmont
 2022 Sewer Rehabilitation
 Crown Castle Communications Facility
 Oakland Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation
 Encroachment Permit Inspection
 2021 Pavement Project
 Highland Guildford Steps
 EBMUD Wildwood Permit
Ross Valley Sanitary District
 Large Diameter Gravity Sewer Project*
Solano Irrigation District
 Lower Weyand Pipeline
 Chadbourne Lateral
 Homestead Phase 2A Backbone
County of Sonoma
 2020 Pavement Preservation Program – FDR & Overlays*
County of Stanislaus
 Road Resurfacing Program – Various Projects*
*Prior to joining Coastland | DCCM

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 10.A.

DATE: JANUARY 21, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: DAVID HANHAM, PLANNING MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDER ADOPTION OF UPDATED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) approving the City of Pinole’s Development Impact Fee Program for the years 2025-2030.

BACKGROUND
Development Impact Fees (DIF) are an important funding tool authorized by California Government Code Sections 66000-66009. These are one-time fees charged to new residential and commercial developments to offset their impacts on public infrastructure, such as street, government facilities (i.e. Police and Fire Stations), and essential services. By allocating costs to growth-related projects, DIF ensures that new development contributes fairly to the community’s infrastructure needs.

The City’s current DIF program was established in 2008. Since then, the DIF has only been adjusted for Consumer Price Index (CPI) rate increases over the last several years. Like most California municipalities, Pinole requires new development to pay fees to fund necessary facilities and services. In December 2018, the City retained Michael Baker International, (MBI) to prepare a Development Impact Fee (DIF) study.

The DIF Study (Attachment B) and the Wastewater Capacity Charge Report (Attachment C) work together to ensure that the City of Pinole has the necessary infrastructure funding in place to support anticipated growth. The DIF study establishes impact fees for public facilities and services for police, fire protection, parks, transportation, and drainage. The Wastewater Capacity Discharge Report specifically addresses the cost of upgrading and expanding the wastewater system. Together these documents ensure that new development contributes proportionately to the cost of constructing and improving essential public infrastructure, aligning with state laws and helping maintain service standards for existing and future populations of Pinole.

On November 19, 2024, the City Council held a public hearing to review the DIF report and directed refinements to the study prepared by MBI. Specifically, the City Council requested a more detailed explanation of the assumptions in the report and additional comparisons of Pinole’s proposed fees with those of neighboring cities.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS

The City of Pinole’s authority to levy public facilities fees is grounded in the State constitution and the general police powers of municipal government under the guidance of the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §66000 et seq.) The reports in Attachments B and C outline a fee structure effective through 2030 and provide the documentation required for the adoption of updated impact fees using methods consistent with State law. MBI’s calculations align with the Mitigation Fee Act, reflecting the fees justified by the current service levels and costs to maintain those levels in proportion to new development impacts. The City anticipates revisiting these fees in 2028 to prepare an update covering the period from 2030 to 2038. This forwardlooking approach aligns with state-mandated practices and supports long-term planning.

In response to Council direction from the November 19, 2024 meeting, Staff reached out to Contra Costa County jurisdictions to gather data on their DIF structures and perform a comparative analysis (Attachment D) of the DIF structure in a variety of Contra Costa County, compared to existing and proposed fees in Pinole. Attachment D also includes examples of how the DIF would apply to specific project scenarios. While this effort provides valuable insights into how Pinole’s fees align with those of nearby cities, it is not an exact comparison due to the differences in growth needs, capacity, and project priorities unique to each community.

An abstracted summary (Attachment E) provides an overview of the fiscal and regulatory framework for infrastructure financing in California, with a specific focus on development impact fees and their application in the City of Pinole. Additionally, the overview provides information on the Study's assumptions. Key points of the new summary include:
• Background on Infrastructure Financing Challenges:
o Local governments face funding constraints due to tax limitations (Propositions 13 and 218), reduced public support for bond measures, and cuts in federal and state aid.
o Development impact fees have become a critical tool for funding infrastructure, levied on new developments to maintain service levels.
• Legal Framework - Mitigation Fee Act:
o Established in 1987, the Act mandates guidelines for imposing and managing impact fees, ensuring fees are proportionate to the infrastructure costs they fund. o It requires fee transparency, accounting, and limits use strictly to the specified purposes, excluding operational costs.
• Facility Standards and Service Levels:
o Impact fees must reflect current service levels, avoiding charging new developments for pre-existing deficiencies.
o Example: Pinole’s park facilities slightly fall short of its General Plan standard but meet current level-of-service benchmarks used for fee calculations. • AB-602 and Residential Impact Fees:

o New regulations now require basing residential impact fees on floor area or providing justification for alternatives, aiming to incentivize smaller, more affordable housing units.
o Challenges exist in correlating floor area with household occupancy, leading some cities to adopt bedroom-based fees.
• Demographic and Development Projections:
o Assumes a 1% annual population and housing growth rate through 2030, reversing prior population declines.
o Projections for new development include a mix of multifamily units, single-family homes, and ADUs.
o Employment growth is projected at a significantly higher rate (6.5% annually), driven by non-residential development.
• General Policy Implications:
o Emphasizes maintaining existing service levels while accommodating new growth.
o Discusses implications for infrastructure costs, transparency, and affordable housing promotion.

Importantly, the City's current DIF structure, last updated comprehensively in 2008, no longer reflects the City’s present needs. An update is overdue to ensure fees are equitable and aligned with Pinole’s infrastructure and service demands. The revised report provides a comprehensive foundation for ensuring the City’s ability to sustain and expand public facilities in response to growth demand for the City of Pinole.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed DIF will generate funds to support necessary public infrastructure, ensuring that new developments contribute their fair share to maintain current service levels without imposing additional costs on existing residents, while adhering to legal requirements that prohibit using the fees for operational or pre-existing deficiencies.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Final DIF Report
C. Final Draft Wastewater Capacity Charge Report
D. Development Impact Fee Comparisons
E. Abstracted Summary

Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

PINOLE ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AND

ADOPTING THE PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEE (NEXUS)

STUDY FOR THE CITY OF PINOLE
WHEREAS, many cities and counties have adopted and imposed development impact fees on new development to pay for new development’s fair share of infrastructure and services; and
WHEREAS, on August 20, 1984, the City Council of the City of Pinole adopted Ordinance No. 462, establishing a Development Impact Fee (DIF) Program in the City of Pinole; and
WHEREAS, the City retained Michael Baker International (MBI) to prepare a Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study dated January, 2025 (the “Study”) in accordance with Government Code § 66000 et seq. for the purpose of updating the DIF Program; and
WHEREAS, the Study provided the City with information and data regarding the nexus between the public facilities and services and the benefiting land uses that would pay the fees at time of development; and WHEREAS, the Study provided data outlining various public facilities and services which are now highly subsidized primarily by the General Fund; and WHEREAS, it is the City’s policy that future new development should contribute its fair share to public facilities and services though the imposition of impact fees which will be used to finance, defray or reimburse the City for the appropriate portion of the cost of public facilities which serve such development; and
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed update of the development impact fees with an opportunity for the public to be heard, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code §§ 66016 – 66018; and
WHEREAS, the Study prepared by MBI has been made available to the public for review and comment at least ten (10) days before a public hearing on the development impact fees pursuant to the provisions of Government Code § 66016; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance No. 462, the City Council of the City of Pinole desires to impose and adopt the Development Impact

Attachment A
Fees in accordance with the nexus calculations and recommendations in the Study.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby find, order, and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Pinole finds and determines that the Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study dated January 1, 2025, prepared by MBI (the “Study”) complies with California Government Code § 66001 by establishing the basis for the imposition of the fees on new development. This finding is based on the fact that the Study:
(a) Identifies the purpose of the fees.
(b) Identifies the use to which the fees will be put into proper accounts. (c) Shows a reasonable relationship between the use of the fees and the type of development project on which the fees are imposed. (d) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development projects on which the fees are imposed; and
(e) Demonstrates a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facilities attributable to the development on which the fees are imposed.

SECTION 2. That the City Council hereby determines that the fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be used to finance the public facilities described or identified in the Study.

SECTION 3. That the City Council has considered the specific project descriptions and cost estimates identified in the Study and hereby approves such project descriptions and cost estimates and finds them reasonable as the basis for calculating and imposing certain development impact fees.

SECTION 4. That the City Council finds that the projects and fee methodology identified in the Report are consistent with the City's General Plan and Capital Improvement Plan.

SECTION 5. The adoption of the Study and the Development Impact Fee Schedule are statutorily and categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), because the setting of development impact fees merely establishes a funding mechanism for the provision of future projects, and as such, the Resolution is not an essential step culminating in action which may affect the environment and environmental review required under CEQA will be performed when projects funded by the development impact fees are chosen and defined (Kaufman & Broad South Bay, Inc. v. Morgan Hill (1993) 9 Cal.App.4th 464.

Attachment A
SECTION 6. That the Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study dated January, 2025, prepared by MBI, incorporated hereto as Exhibit A is hereby adopted.

SECTION 7. That the fees specified in the attached Exhibit A shall become effective sixty (60) days following the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of _____ 2025. __________________________
Cameron Sasai, Mayor
City of Pinole
ATTEST:
___________________________
Heather Bell
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM
____________________________
Eric Casher,
City Attorney

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A
Facility Category 3 bedrooms1 2 Bedrooms1 1 Bedroom Office Commercial Food
Service Industrial Institutional
Fee per Dwelling Unit Fee per 1 Square Foot of Building Floor Area Police $1,384.15 $1,126.17 $868.19 $0.67 $0.38 $0.38 $0.54 $0.18 Fire Protection $2,499.06 $2,033.28 $1,567.51 $1.21 $0.69 $0.69 $0.97 $0.32 Public Facilities &
Equipment
$4,609.19 $3,750.13 $2,891.07 $2.23 $1.28 $1.28 $1.78 $0.60 Transportation $581.01 $472.72 $364.43 $0.67 $1.41 $1.41 $1.21 $0.96 Drainage2 $261.36 $149.33 N/A $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.19 $0.23 Parks and Recreation $10,561.46 $8,593.02 $6,624.57 N/
A

N/A N/A N/A N/
A
Wastewater Capacity $9,499.19 $5,509.53 N/A $1.33 $0.66 $11.21 $3.51 $0.76 Subtotal $29,395.42 $21,634.18 $12,315.77 $6.21 $4.52 $15.07 $8.20 $3.04 Administration 3% $881.86 $649.03 $369.47 $0.19 $0.14 $0.45 $0.25 $0.09 Total $30,277.29 $22,283.21 $12,685.24 $6.39 $4.66 $15.52 $8.45 $3.13 1 This study is written to conform to AB-602 (Grayson, 2021), which requires impact fees on residential development to be charged by floor area. For this study, the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit is used as an alternative basis to calculate the impact fee. A dwelling unit with 3 bedrooms is comparable to a single-family home and 2 bedrooms are compared to a multi-family home. 2The Drainage fee is per impervious area of a typical single-family (3-bedroom) or multi-family 2-bedroom) project--not floor area, these fees are shown for comparison.

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT MITIGATION FEE NEXUS STUDY
Prepared for the

CITY OF PINOLE
Prepared by
3100 Zinfandel Drive, Suite 125
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
(619) 218-9578
www.mbakerintl.com
Final DraftReport
January 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary...........................................................................................................................................1 Background and Study Objectives.............................................................................................................1 Fee Schedules and Revenues.....................................................................................................................2 Fee Comparisons .......................................................................................................................................2 Funds Needed to Complement Fee Program.............................................................................................5 Additional Considerations .........................................................................................................................5

1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................7 Public Facilities Financing in California .....................................................................................................7 Statutory Authority to Impose Impact Fees the Mitigation Fee Act and Required Findings .....................7 Organization of the Report .......................................................................................................................9 Facility Standards....................................................................................................................................10

2. Growth Projections..................................................................................................................................11 Population, Housing, and Employment Estimates ..................................................................................11 Land Use Categories................................................................................................................................13 Service Population...................................................................................................................................13 Occupant Densities .................................................................................................................................14 AB-602 Compliance .................................................................................................................................14

3. Police Facilities ........................................................................................................................................16 Existing Police Facilities...........................................................................................................................16 Police Facilities Service Population..........................................................................................................16 Police Facilities Standards and Unit Costs...............................................................................................16 Police Facilities Cost for New Development ............................................................................................17 Fee Schedule ...........................................................................................................................................18

4. Fire Protection Facilities ..........................................................................................................................19 Fire Facilities Service Population .............................................................................................................19 Existing Fire Facilities ..............................................................................................................................19 Personal Protection Equipment ..........................................................................................................20 Fire Facilities Standards and Unit Costs ..................................................................................................20 Fire Facilities Cost for New Development................................................................................................21 Fee Schedule ...........................................................................................................................................21

5. Public Facilities and Equipment ...............................................................................................................23

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
ii
Existing Municipal Facilities ....................................................................................................................23 Public Facilities Service Population .........................................................................................................24 Public Facilities Standards and Unit Costs...............................................................................................24 Per Capita Standards and Unit Costs...................................................................................................24 Public Facilities Cost for New Development ............................................................................................25 Fee Schedule ...........................................................................................................................................26

6. Parks and Recreation Facilities ................................................................................................................27 Existing Parks and Recreation Facilities ..................................................................................................27 Park Cost Estimate...............................................................................................................................29 Parks and Recreation Standards and Unit Costs .....................................................................................30 Per Capita Standards and Unit Costs...................................................................................................30 Parks and Recreation Cost for New Development ..................................................................................31 Fee Schedule ...........................................................................................................................................31

7. Transportation Facilities ..........................................................................................................................32 Transportation Facilities Standards ........................................................................................................32 Level of Service with New Development.............................................................................................32 Transportation Demand from New Development...................................................................................32 SB-743 Impact on Use of Intersection Level of Service .......................................................................35 Transportation Improvements Cost for New Development ....................................................................35 Planned Projects..................................................................................................................................35 Transportation Improvement Costs Per VMT..........................................................................................36 Fee Schedule ...........................................................................................................................................36

8. Drainage Facilities ...................................................................................................................................38 Drainage Impacts of Existing and New Development .............................................................................38 Planned Drainage Improvements............................................................................................................40 Drainage Facility Impact Costs Per Acre..................................................................................................40 Drainage Facilities Standards and Unit Costs .........................................................................................40 Fee Schedule ...........................................................................................................................................40

9. Implementation.......................................................................................................................................42 Impact Fee Program Adoption Process ...................................................................................................42 Programming Revenues and Projects with the Capital Improvement Plan.............................................42 Funds Needed to Complement Impact Fee Program ..............................................................................42 Inflation Adjustment ...............................................................................................................................42 Combining Fees .......................................................................................................................................43

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
iii
Compliance Requirements ......................................................................................................................43 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................................45 Municipal Equipment and Vehicles .........................................................................................................45 Police Equipment and Vehicles................................................................................................................46 Police Equipment and Vehicles (continued) ............................................................................................47 Depreciated Replacement Value of City Buildings ..................................................................................48 Existing Land Use Acreages by General Plan Designation ......................................................................49 List of Tables
Table 1 – Proposed and Current Impact Fee Schedule.......................................................................................3 Table 2 – Fee Comparison .................................................................................................................................4 Table 3 – Total Impact Fee Revenues ................................................................................................................5 Table 4 – Three Corridors Specific Plan Land Use Projections..........................................................................11 Table 5 – Population, Housing, and Employment Projections ..........................................................................12 Table 6 – Household and Employee Occupancy Assumptions..........................................................................15 Table 7 – Police Facilities and Equipment........................................................................................................16 Table 8 – Police Service Population .................................................................................................................16 Table 9 – Police Facilities Standard Cost Per Capita.........................................................................................17 Table 10 – Equipment for Incremental Officers Needed for Growth................................................................17 Table 11 – Police Facilities Cost for New Development ...................................................................................18 Table 12 – Police Facilities Proposed Fee Schedule .........................................................................................18 Table 13 – Fire Protection Service Population .................................................................................................19 Table 14 – Fire Protection Inventory ...............................................................................................................19 Table 15 – Personal Fire Protection Equipment...............................................................................................20 Table 16 – Fire Protection Cost per Capita Standard .......................................................................................21 Table 17 – Fire Facilities Cost for New Development.......................................................................................21 Table 18 – Proposed Fire Facilities Impact Fee ................................................................................................22 Table 19 – Community Facilities Inventory......................................................................................................23

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
iv
Table 20 – Municipal Facilities Inventory ........................................................................................................23 Table 21 – Public Facilities Service Population ................................................................................................24 Table 22 – Public Facilities Current Values per Capita .....................................................................................24 Table 23 – EV Charging Station Cost per Capita...............................................................................................25 Table 24 – Public Facilities Cost for New Development ...................................................................................25 Table 25 – Proposed Public Facilities Impact Fee.............................................................................................26 Table 26 – Existing Developed Park Facilities Inventory ..................................................................................28 Table 27 – Existing Open Space Inventory .......................................................................................................29 Table 28 – Other Recreation Improvements....................................................................................................29 Table 29 – Park Level of Service Standards......................................................................................................29 Table 30 – Cost Estimate for a Typical Park .....................................................................................................30 Table 31 – Park Facility Standards and Costs per Capita ..................................................................................30 Table 32 – Park Cost for New Development ....................................................................................................31 Table 33 – Proposed Park Impact Fee..............................................................................................................31 Table 34 – Transportation Demand 2024-2030 ...............................................................................................34 Table 35 – Transportation Improvements .......................................................................................................36 Table 36 – Transportation Improvements Cost per VMT .................................................................................36 Table 37 – Proposed Transportation Impact Fee .............................................................................................37 Table 38 – Drainage Impacts ...........................................................................................................................39 Table 39 – Drainage Improvements.................................................................................................................40 Table 40 – Drainage Improvements per Impervious Acre ................................................................................40 Table 41 – Proposed Drainage Impact Fee.......................................................................................................41

SUMMARY
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents an analysis of the cost of public facilities to accommodate new development in the City of Pinole. The report documents the justifiable impact fees that may be imposed on new development in the following facility categories:
• Police Facilities
• Fire Protection
• Public Facilities and Equipment
• Transportation Facilities
• Drainage Facilities
• Parks and Recreation Facilities
In a separate report, the proposed Wastewater Capacity Charge is documented. The Waterwater Capacity Charge is included in this Executive Summary
Background and Study Objectives
This study documents the relationship between new development in Pinole and the cost of public facilities to serve growth through the year 2030. The study also estimates the cost of facilities necessary for growth and calculates the updated impact fees by land use type that would generate revenues equal to these costs. The estimates of public facilities required to serve growth assume that new development will provide facilities that, at a minimum, ensure the City will maintain its current level of service standards for these facilities.

As do most municipalities in California, the City of Pinole requires new development to pay fees to fund the facilities necessary to provide those City services required by the new development. For the past several decades, since the passage of Proposition 13 and other state fiscal measures that have reduced local revenues, most of the local revenue sources, such as property tax and sales tax, are used primarily for operations and maintenance and have not been a reliable source for capital funding. Federal and state assistance has not replaced the decline in local revenue sources. These funding shortfalls have been a significant contributing factor in declining facility standards, including undercapacity of facilities relative to optimum use. This has led to an accelerated rate of physical deterioration and increased operating costs and reduced the efficiency of existing facilities and city departments. Given these funding difficulties and in the face of continued growth, most California cities and counties have adopted impact fee programs to provide the necessary funding for the capital facilities needed to serve growth.

The City of Pinole will rely on its authority to levy public facilities fees under the Mitigation Fee Act, contained in Government Code Section 66000 et seq. This report provides the necessary documentation for the adoption of updated impact fees.

SUMMARY
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
2 Fee Schedules and Revenues
Table 1 summarizes the schedule of proposed and current impact fees for each facility category and within each land use category based on the analysis in this report. For comparison, a survey of the fees charged in neighboring cities for single-family homes is summarized in Table 2.

Fee Comparisons
The fee comparison table is from a survey of fees charged for the equivalent facility categories in cities comparable to Pinole. Even though each city in California, to adopt impact fees, must follow the same general principles established by state law, as described in the Introduction section of this report, fees— even among neighboring jurisdictions—tend to vary widely due to several factors:
• The methods used to calculate the impact fees and allocate the fees to types of development differ from city to city.
• The types of facilities that are covered by impact fees vary. • Cities adopt different standards, or levels of service, for facilities, and may use different ways to calculate those standards.
• Cities may not have kept up with public improvements over the years and, consequently, have created deficiencies between adopted or desired levels of service and the levels currently provided. This factor may work to reduce the impact fee, since the costs to remedy the existing deficiencies cannot be passed on to new development.
• Cities may be at different points in the impact fee update cycle. State law requires that the nexus study be updated every eight years. Studies that are nearing the eighth year since the last update tend to reflect lower fees even as impact fees may have been increased by an annual inflation factor.

Furthermore, cities may allow alternatives to impact fees to finance public facilities. Assessment and Mello-Roos districts may be used for improvements that serve specific projects. District assessments and special taxes levied to provide public improvements sometimes replace impact fees that would otherwise be used for those improvements. For example, The City of Pinole is considering whether to conduct a feasibility study of establishing an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) on one of the City’s specific plan areas. An EIFD would allow a portion of the property tax increment derived from increased land values in the district to finance public improvements needed for the development. If the EIFD were adopted the project’s development agreement could specify that the tax increment funding of a capital improvement would be used to offset an impact fee for the corresponding facility category.

SUMMARY
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
3 Table 1 – Proposed and Current Impact Fee Schedule
Proposed Fees
Facility Category 3 bedrooms1 2 Bedrooms1 1 Bedroom Office Commercial Food Service Industrial Institutional Fee per Dwelling Unit Fee per 1 Square Foot of Building Floor Area Police $1,384.15 $1,126.17 $868.19 $0.67 $0.38 $0.38 $0.54 $0.18 Fire Protection $2,499.06 $2,033.28 $1,567.51 $1.21 $0.69 $0.69 $0.97 $0.32 Public Facilities &
Equipment
$4,609.19 $3,750.13 $2,891.07 $2.23 $1.28 $1.28 $1.78 $0.60 Transportation $581.01 $472.72 $364.43 $0.67 $1.41 $1.41 $1.21 $0.96 Drainage2 $261.36 $149.33 N/A $0.10 $0.10 $0.10 $0.19 $0.23 Parks and Recreation $10,561.46 $8,593.02 $6,624.57 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Wastewater Capacity $9,499.19 $5,509.53 N/A $1.33 $0.66 $11.21 $3.51 $0.76 Subtotal $29,395.42 $21,634.18 $12,315.77 $6.21 $4.52 $15.07 $8.20 $3.04 Administration 3% $881.86 $649.03 $369.47 $0.19 $0.14 $0.45 $0.25 $0.09 Total $30,277.29 $22,283.21 $12,685.24 $6.39 $4.66 $15.52 $8.45 $3.13 1 This study is written to conform to AB-602 (Grayson, 2021), which requires impact fees on residential development to be charged by floor area. For this study, the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit is used as an alternative basis to calculate the impact fee. A dwelling unit with 3 bedrooms is comparable to a single-family home and 2 bedrooms are compared to a multi-family home. 2The Drainage fee is per impervious area of a typical single-family (3-bedroom) or multi-family 2-bedroom) project--not floor area, these fees are shown for comparison.

Current Fees
Facility Category Single-Family Multifamily Office Commercial Food Service Industrial Institutional Fee per Dwelling Unit Fee per 1 Square Foot of Building Floor Area Police $1,321.29 $1,000.98 $0.50 $0.16 N/A $0.40 $0.04
Fire Protection $1,688.49 $1,279.16 $0.64 $0.20 N/A $0.51 $0.05 Public Facilities &
Equipment $2,278.48 $1,726.13 $0.86 $0.28 N/A $0.69 $0.07 Transportation $477.05 $338.71 $0.64 $1.60 N/A $0.42 $1.21 Drainage $1,270.54 $76.23 $0.19 $0.19 N/A $0.37 $0.44
Parks and Recreation $9,215.85 $6,981.71 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Wastewater Capacity $5,684.45 $4,263.05 $2.64 $2.64 N/A $2.16 $1.44 Subtotal $21,936.15 $15,665.97 $5.47 $5.07 N/A $4.55 $3.25 Administration 3% $658.08 $469.98 $0.16 $0.15 N/A $0.14 $0.10 Total $22,594.23 $16,135.95 $5.63 $5.22 N/A $4.69 $3.35

SUMMARY
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
4 Table 2 – Fee Comparison
City Population Police Fire
Parks or
Park Land
Dedication
Public
Facilities
Wastewater
Capacity
Charge Traffic* Drainage Total
Single-Family Home
Hercules1 26,063 $1,522 $1,886 $3,270 $858 $4,857 $6,204 N/A $18,597 El Cerrito2 25,700 N/A N/A $2,671 N/A $9,112 $4,172 N/A $15,955 Orinda3 19,191 N/A N/A $22,418 N/A $8,539 $10,090 $7,095 $48,142 Albany4 19,053 N/A N/A $8,511 $975 $3,130 N/A $150 $12,766 San Pablo 31,088 N/A N/A $7,840 N/A $5,983 N/A N/A $13,823 Pleasant Hill 33,352 N/A N/A $7,220 $8,539 $3,879 $2,104 $21,742 Moraga 16,784 $1,002 N/A $25,411 $9,076 $8,539 $10,090 $2,169 $56,287 Lafayette 24,808 N/A N/A $23,500 N/A $8,539 $10,090 $2,288 $44,417 Average Fee: $1,262 $1,886 $12,605 $3,636 $7,155 $7,421 $2,761 $28.966 Pinole Fees
Current (pop. 2024)
single family 18,192 $1,361 $1,739 $9,492 $2,347 $5,855 $491 $1,309 $22,594 Proposed (pop. 2030)
3-bedroom house 19,312 $1,425 $2,574 $10,878 $4,747 $9,784 $598 $269 $30,277 *Does not include West County Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program Fee: $6,964, charged to El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo, and the County of Contra Costa; West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee https://www.westcontracostatc.gov/app_pages/view/210 1 The Hercules park fee in the table includes a $1,500 "Community Development Tax" to be used to fund park improvements and land acquisition, public facilities, and public safety related equipment. Note: A separate "Public Benefit Fee" of $2,350 is charged to units in the Bayfront Project area, this fee is not included in the table. 2 El Cerrito has adopted only park and traffic impact fees. The Stege Sanitary District, which serves El Cerrito, charges a capacity fee of $350.48 per fixture unit. The fee given is based on 26 fixture units, a typical number for a single-family home. 3 The Orinda park dedication fee is based on $760,500 per acre per Orinda Municipal Code 3.28.080 (2005 appraisal report) and annually adjusted. 5 acres/1,000 & 2.69 single family occupancy. Drainage fee is $1.65 per square foot of impervious area greater than 100 sq. ft., amount in table is for 4,300 sq. ft. of area approximately the are assumed for a single family home in Pinole. 4 The Albany capital facilities fee (applicable to all public facilities) is $0.65 per square feet for a new residential unit 1,001 sq. ft. or greater (the table assumes 1,500 sq. ft.). Drainage fee is $0.10 per sq. ft. (table assumes 1,500 sq. ft.). The Albany park dedication in-lieu fee based on fair market value (AMC 22-8.4 g). Parkland in-lieu fee in table is based on a dedication requirement for a single-family home of 392 sq. ft. (3 acres per 1,000 occupancy of 3 per unit), and a fair market value of $21 per sq. ft.

SUMMARY
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
5 Funds Needed to Complement Fee Program
Government Code Section 66000 prohibits using impact fees exclusively to increase the current level of service (the facility standard). Impact fees imposed on new development may be used only to: 1) provide additional facilities needed to maintain the current standard of service, or 2) increase the standard if existing development also pays for its proportionate share of facilities needed to raise the standard. The analysis contained in this report indicates that in the Fire Protection, Public Facilities, Transportation Drainage and wastewater categories, existing development would benefit from the proposed facilities and additions to capital included in those categories. Therefore, existing development is obligated to pay for a portion of new capital improvements. The impact fee rates presented in this report for these five categories may be imposed on new development only if existing development provides the funding necessary to augment existing facilities from sources other than the impact fee revenues. These funds may come from grants, user fees, taxes, and assessments imposed on current residents. The level of funding required from existing development is listed in the General Fund/Other Sources column in Table

3. Table 3 – Total Impact Fee Revenues
Facility Category
Projected
Revenues
from Proposed
Impact Fees*
General
Fund/Other
Sources Program Total
Police $1,106,049 $0 $1,106,049
Fire Protection $2,088,059 $8,186,119 $10,274,178
Public Facilities & Equipment $3,843,737 $4,498,009 $8,341,746 Parks and Recreation $4,239,726 $0 $4,239,726
Transportation $1,079,207 $7,680,589 $8,759,796
Drainage $113,171 $3,101,927 $3,215,098
Wastewater Capacity $4,062,251 $11,145,749 $15,208,000
Total $16,532,201 $34,612,393 $51,144,594
*Projected revenues are contingent on the new development forecasted in Chapter 2 If the entire fee program as presented herein is adopted, the City and its current residents and business would need to contribute approximately $34.6 million from sources other than fee revenues to provide facilities to existing residents at the same level of service proposed for new development. New development is projected to contribute $16.5 million of the $51.1 million capital improvement program total (approximately 32 percent). The proposed capital improvements that comprise the “Program Total” are described in Chapters 3 through 8 of this report, and in the Wastewater Capacity Charge report.

Additional Considerations
The City, at its sole discretion, may reduce the impact fees or eliminate them entirely. By doing so, however, there will inevitably be a continued reduction in the levels of service provided by these public facilities, unless other funds are used to replace the fee revenues. Alternatively, the City may consider the following ways to reduce the effect the fees may have on land development in the City, while leaving the fee rates and standards of service intact:

SUMMARY
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
6 • Phase in the fee increases over two or more years to allow time for real estate markets to adjust.

However, the loss of revenue during the phase-in period may not be passed on to future development.
• The impact fees may be deferred to a later date. For residential units, the fees are not payable until the date of the final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever comes first. The City may grant a further deferral of payment until units are sold or leased. With any deferral arrangement, the City should obtain suitable security for payment of the fee, through a surety bond, letter of credit, provisions in the escrow agreements, or a lien-hold as appropriate.

Fee Updates
This impact fee study and the recommended fees assume a given level of development activity over the study period. If different from the growth forecasted in this study, the development that occurs will result in both different impacts and fee revenues than those that are projected. For that reason, regular updates are recommended to adjust the impact fee to match the needs of actual development. Government Code 660016.5 requires that, beginning on January 1, 2022, impact fee nexus studies shall be updated at least every eight years.

1. INTRODUCTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
7 1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents an analysis of the need and related cost of public facilities to accommodate new development in the City of Pinole. This chapter explains the study approach and summarizes results under the following sections:
• Public facilities financing in California.
• The Mitigation Fee Act.
• Organization of the report.
• Facility standards; and
• Fee schedules
Public Facilities Financing in California
The changing fiscal landscape in California over the past few decades has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure. Three dominant trends stand out:
• The passage of a string of tax limitation measures, starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996. • Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses; and
• Steep reductions in federal and state assistance.

Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to shift the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing ratepayers and taxpayers to new development. This funding shift has been partly accomplished by the imposition of development impact fees, also known as public facility fees or mitigation fees. A key advantage of this approach is that impact fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption and are thus exempt from the requirements of Proposition 218.

In most jurisdictions that have implemented impact fee programs, new development pays close to the full cost required to maintain existing level of service standards as growth occurs. If cities did not collect the full amount, the effect is often a decline in facility standards, though some communities are able to increase other revenue sources to compensate. Often the scenario is that a city’s current level of service for a particular facility category is less than the standard stated in its general plan policies, creating a “deficiency.” In that event, the city must remedy the deficiency using funds other than impact fee revenues; new development shall not be required to pay for an increase in the level of service for the benefit of existing development.

Statutory Authority to Impose Impact Fees the Mitigation Fee Act and Required Findings
In California, cities and counties rely on their authority to levy impact mitigation fees under the police powers granted by the California Constitution. As a result of widespread imposition of public facilities fees, the state legislature passed the Mitigation Fee Act (Act), starting with Assembly Bill (AB) 1600 in

1. INTRODUCTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
8 1987. The Act, contained in California Government Code Section 66000 et seq., establishes ground rules for the imposition and ongoing administration of impact fee programs. The Act went into effect in January 1989 and requires local governments to document the following when adopting an impact fee:
1) Identify the purpose of the fee.
2) Identify the use of fee revenues.
3) Determine a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development paying the fee.
4) Determine a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type of development paying the fee; and
5) Determine a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the facility attributable to development paying the fee.

The fundamental premise of the Act is that the burden of the impact fees cannot total more than the actual cost of the public facility needed to serve the development paying the fee. Also, fee revenues can only be used for their intended purposes. In addition, the Act has specific accounting and reporting requirements annually and every five years for the use of fee revenues covered in Chapter 9 of this report.

In addition, the Act prohibits using impact fee revenues for staffing, operations, and maintenance of either existing or new facilities.

AB 602 Findings
This bill (amending Government Code Sections 65490.1, 66016.5 and 66019) requires, on and after January 1, 2022, a local agency that conducts an impact fee nexus study to follow specific standards and practices, including, but not limited to:
1) That prior to the adoption of an associated development fee, an impact fee nexus study be adopted.
2) That the study identifies the existing level of service for each public facility, identifies the proposed new level of service, and includes an explanation of why the new level of service is necessary, and; 3) If the study is adopted after July 1, 2022, either calculate a fee levied or imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units or make specified findings explaining why it is not appropriate to calculate the fee based on square footage.

The law is intended to promote greater accountability in impact fee programs. AB 602 also encourages public agencies conducting new nexus studies to calculate fees imposed on housing development projects by determining the square footage of the proposed housing units and developing a fee proportional to the square footage of those units. If public agencies do not use this approach to calculating fees imposed on housing development projects, they must do all the following:
1) Make findings that explain why square footage is not an appropriate metric; 2) Provide an alternative basis of calculating the fee that bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development; and 3) Ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.

1. INTRODUCTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
9 This report complies with applicable California Government Code sections by providing the required documentation for the above findings and determinations that establish the basis for imposition of the recommended fees contained herein.

Organization of the Report
Chapter 2 presents the population and employment assumptions used for the public facilities fee analysis.

Chapters 3 through 8 are devoted to documenting the justifiable impact fee for each of the following facility categories:
● Police Facilities
● Fire Protection Facilities
● Public Facilities and Equipment
● Parks and Recreation Facilities
● Transportation Facilities
● Drainage Facilities
Each chapter is generally organized using the following sections to clearly document the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, discussed above:
• The chapter begins by identifying the purpose of the fee by stating the types of facilities that would be funded.
• The Existing and Future Planned Facilities Inventory (if applicable) summarizes the investment of existing development in this type of facility to date and identifies future planned facilities, if any.
• The Service Population defines what type of development requires this type of facility, whether (1) only residents or (2) residents and businesses (measured by employment). It also projects the service population growth or demand for facility capacity anticipated to occur over the planning horizon.
• The Facility Standards and Unit Costs establishes a reasonable relationship between the need for the fee and the type of development paying the fee. This section also estimates the cost per capita for facilities to accommodate growth.
• The Facility Costs for New Development establishes a reasonable relationship between the use of fee revenues and the type of development paying the fee. This section estimates the total facilities costs associated with new development over the planning horizon, equal to the revenues that would be collected through the impact fee. • The Fee Schedule establishes a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the facility attributable to development paying the fee. Using a common factor for

1. INTRODUCTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
10 facilities’ cost per capita, the fee schedule ensures that each development project pays its fair share of total cost of facilities.

Finally, Chapter 9 summarizes the fee implementation procedures and recommendations for the ongoing administration of the fee. The recommendations are provided to ensure compliance with the Act, and to ensure that fees are updated in the future for construction cost inflation, a change in the standards, or changes in development assumptions.

Facility Standards
New development alone cannot be asked to improve facility standards that benefit both new and existing development. Additionally, new development alone cannot correct an existing facility deficiency. Either way, facility standards cannot be increased compared to existing standards solely by imposing impact fees on new development.

By policy, Pinole can adopt its own reasonable facility standards to reduce, maintain, or increase the existing facility standards. However, basing an impact fee on a standard that is higher than the existing standard is fair to new development only if Pinole were to use alternative funds to raise the standard of facilities that benefit existing development. This extra funding is needed to correct the "existing deficiency."
This study uses two approaches for establishing facility standards:
• The existing standard method uses a standard based on the ratio of existing facilities to the current service population. Under this approach, new development funds the expansion of facilities at the same standard currently serving existing development. This approach results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is used for police, parks and recreation, and drainage public facilities, vehicles, and equipment associated with general government services.
• The engineering method uses standards adopted by the City and/or found in standard engineering or planning criteria. This method is used for the transportation and drainage facilities. The standard aims to maintain the appropriate capacity for all roadway segments/intersections and drainage infrastructure to ensure public health and safety. Any costs related to existing deficiencies are not passed on to new development.

Use of these standards is not meant to label them as City policy. Indeed, many jurisdictions consider their existing standards to be deficient compared to the policies stated in their General Plans. The City of Pinole may, as a policy decision, raise any facility standard, and in doing so, possibly create a deficiency relative to the stated level of service. The premise of this study is that such de facto deficiencies shall be avoided by basing the fees on existing standards were possible.

2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
11 2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Population, Housing, and Employment Estimates
Estimates of existing development (number and type of housing and commercial floor area) and projections of growth are baseline assumptions used throughout the public facility fee chapters in this report. Current residential population estimates are based on the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates released in January 2024. Future employment (jobs within the city as opposed to employed residents who live in the city but may work elsewhere) are based on estimates using the U.S. Census Bureau’s On the Map tool. Housing and nonresidential development in the city will largely be the result of implementation of the Three Corridors Specific Plan (Specific Plan), which is a priority development area identified in the Association of Bay Area Governments’ Bay Area Plan. The projected land uses in the Specific Plan are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4 – Three Corridors Specific Plan Land Use Projections Corridor
Residential
Units Retail (sq. ft.) Office (sq. ft.) Industrial (sq. ft.) San Pablo Ave. 885 322,172 336,253 426,692
Pinole Valley Road 141 238,708 105,038 1,239
Appian Way 244 561,260 468,449 48,352
Existing Total 1,270 1,122,140 909,740 476,283
San Pablo Ave. 1,119 552,927 307,233 472,578
Pinole Valley Road 351 192,603 386,843 0
Appian Way 877 807,698 728,129 0
Proposed Total 2,346 1,553,228 1,422,205 589,578
Difference 1,076 431,088 512,465 113,295
Source Appendix A: Development Projections “Three Corridors Specific Plan” updated in 2020.

The current (2024) and projected 2030 population, housing, and employment estimates are summarized in Table 5. An annual population growth rate of 1.00 percent was used to project population growth for the analysis period 2024-2030. This results in a population increase of 1,100. As have many cities in California, Pinole has experienced negative population growth since the 2020 decennial census reported the city’s population to be 19,505. The 2024 DOF estimate placed the population at 18,192, a 4 percent drop since 2020 and a drop of 0.3 percent from DOF’s 2023 estimate. Positive population growth is resuming in California, but it is a slow process largely dependent on the availability of affordable homes.

While the Specific Plan may provide housing opportunities in the future, it is not reasonable to expect its build out to occur over the next 5 or 6 years. Therefore, a more modest assumption of 375 new multifamily units plus 30 new single-family units is projected by the year 2030. The construction of single-family units is assumed to take place on vacant R-1 and Rural Residential parcels, all of which are located outside the Specific Plan area. Land use data compiled for the 2023-2031 Housing Element indicates approximately 193 acres of vacant R-1 and R-R parcels. An average density of 5 units per acres assumed for the projection of 30 new single-family units.

2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
12 Table 5 – Population, Housing, and Employment Projections 2024 2030
Net
Growth2
Average
Annual
Rate
Population1 18,192 19,312 1,120 1.0%
Employment3
Retail/Commercial 1,315 1,795 480
Office/Service 328 658 330
Industrial, including transportation,
construction, agriculture, manufacturing,
wholesale 519 746 227
Accommodations 32 36 4
Food Service 1,022 1,496 474
Health Care and Social Services 945 1,896 951
Public/Institutional/Educational Services 724 724 0
Other 6 6 0
Total Employment 4,891 7,357 2,466 7.0%
Housing4
Single-Family Units5 5,456 5,486 30
Multifamily Units6 1,383 1,758 375
Mobile Homes/ADU7 34 64 30
Total Occupied Units 6,873 7,308 435 1.0%
Overall Occupancy 2.65 2.64 2.57
1 Current population for City of Pinole is the California Department of Finance (DOF) Estimate, Table E-5 as of 1/1/2024.
2 Population growth is based on a 1 percent average annual growth rate. It is noted that the population growth projections in Table 5 of the Housing Element Update shows a 0.6 percent annual growth rate between 2010 and 2020. The assumption of 1 percent growth over the next 5 -6 years during a period of recovery from historically low growth is reasonable. 3 Current employment estimates from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, US Census Bureau 2020. 2030 employment based on Three Corridors Specific Plan floor area growth and employment density factors.
4 Source of current housing estimates is DOF Table E-5 as of 1/1/2024, occupied units. 5 Estimate of occupied detached and attached single-family dwelling units. 6 Estimates of occupied units, including duplex, townhomes, and apartments. 7 The 30 units added in this category by 2030 are assumed to be Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Sources: CA-DOF Demographics Unit; City of Pinole
These estimates are used as follows:
• Estimates of future growth are used to aid in the planning of future public facilities required to accommodate growth over the planning horizon.
• Estimates of existing population and land development are used to determine current facility standards—for example, square feet of public buildings per capita or average daily trips per household to correlate with traffic level of service.

2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
13 Land Use Categories
Measuring the impact of growth requires land use types for summarizing different categories of new development. The land use types used in this analysis are defined below. • Single-family: Detached and attached (townhomes) one-family dwelling units. • Multifamily: All multifamily dwellings such as duplexes and condominiums (unless considered attached “townhomes”), apartments, and dormitories.
• Accessory Dwelling Units: ADUs are independent living facilities that may be within, attached to or detached from the primary dwelling. ADUs are permitted under Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) Chapter 17.70. According to PMC 17.70.040 ADU may not exceed 800 square feet. The Municipal Code also provides that ADUs 750 square feet or less floor area shall not be charged an impact fee. Impact fees on ADUs greater than 750 square feet shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling with which it is associated. • Commercial/Retail: All commercial service providers, retail stores, restaurants, and fast food. • Office: All general, professional, and medical office development. • Industrial: All manufacturing and warehouse development. • Institutional: Educational institutions, hospitals, etc.

Some developments may include more than one land use category, such as an educational institution with dormitories, or a mixed-use development with both residential and commercial uses. In these cases, the impact fee would be calculated separately for each land use category.

The City may levy the impact fee based on the land use category that most closely represents the probable occupant density of the development. The City may use its discretion to calculate the fee that is levied on a development project based on either the number of dwelling units per acre, workers per floor area, or both, or the number of peak-period vehicle trips expected to be generated by the project.

Service Population
Different types of development use public facilities at different rates in relation to each other, depending on the services provided. In each chapter, a specific service population is identified for each facility type to reflect this. Different service populations are used to estimate impacts for different types of facilities. • Citywide residents and workers for public facilities such as those used by city administration, fire protection and police facilities.
• Citywide residents for parks and recreation facilities. • Dwelling units and building square feet to estimate vehicle trips for transportation facilities and drainage impacts.

Each land use imposes demands on facilities in proportion to the service population they generate. By using the service population to calculate fees, the fees are directly related to the impact of the land use based on number of units or floor area. The specific service population for each facility category is shown separately in each chapter. When residents and workers are part of the same service population, it is

2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
14 reasonable to assume that one resident would place a greater demand on public services and associated facilities than one worker. The method used in this study for calculating the demand of one worker relative to one resident is to compare the length of the typical work week (45 hours, which includes lunch break) to the average total daylight hours in a seven-day week (84 hours). Based upon this method, one worker is assumed to generate roughly 54 percent of the demand for facilities as a resident (45/84 = 0.54); this factor is used for police, fire, and public facilities.

These measures are reasonable indicators of the level of demand for public facilities. The City builds public facilities primarily to serve these populations and, typically, the greater the population, the larger the facility required to provide a given level of service.

Occupant Densities
Occupant densities ensure a reasonable relationship between the increase in service population and amount of the fee. To do this, the fee must vary by the estimated service population generated by a particular development project. Developers pay the fee based on the capacity of new development to house residents or workers, so the fee analysis must convert service population estimates to suitable measures of project size to arrive at a fee per unit of development. This conversion is done with average occupant density factors for residential and for commercial and industrial land use categories, as shown in Table 6.

AB-602 Compliance
As discussed in the Introduction, AB-602 (Grayson 2021) requires that cities adopting new or increased fees after January 1, 2022, should charge impact fees on residential development based on the floor area of development or make a finding that charging the fees based on floor area is not an appropriate method.

Residential projects in Pinole are currently charged a flat rate per unit for either single family homes (including detached condominiums) or individual units within multi-family apartment projects. The intent of AB 602 was to incentivize smaller units by charging higher fees on larger units and thus encourage the construction of more affordable housing in California.

However, charging residential development based on floor area presents a problem since development impacts on most facilities are measured based on the project’s projected service population (residential or employment population) and while there is data that correlates floor area with the number of employees for many industries, which allows the use of employee density factors in terms of square feet per employee as shown in Table 6, there is not data currently available that may be used to estimate household occupancy per square foot of floor area. The recommended solution that is in keeping with the intent of AB-602—to incentivize smaller units--is charging by the bedroom without regard to whether the project contains single or multi-family units. The US Census provides data on occupancy per bedroom for major statistical areas. An analysis of the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward MSA indicates residential occupancies per unit based on the number of bedrooms as shown in Table 6.

2. GROWTH PROJECTIONS
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
15 Table 6 – Household and Employee Occupancy Assumptions Residential, Number of
Bedrooms in Unit
Occupants per Unit Occupants per Bedroom
0 (studio) 1.23 N/A
1 1.75 1.75
2 2.27 1.14
3 2.79 0.93
4 3.30 0.83
5 3.82 0.76
Occupants for each additional bedroom1 0.52
Nonresidential Building Floor Area per Employee2
Employees Density
per 1,000 square
feet or room
Office 400 building square feet
per worker

2.50 Retail/Commercial 700 building square feet
per worker

1.43 Hotel Rooms 3.33 rooms per worker 0.30
Food Service 200 building square feet
per worker

5.00 Health Care 400 building square feet
per worker

2.50 Industrial 500 building square feet
per worker

2.00 Institutional 1,500 building square feet
per worker

0.67 1For units with 6 bedrooms and above, each bedroom would add 0.52 occupants. For example, a unit with 6 bedrooms would be projected to house 4.34 occupants. 2Building area per worker factors are based on the Employment Density Study for Southern California Association of Governments, by the Natelson Company, 2001.

The impact fee for a project is determined by multiplying the projected occupants of the project by the cost per capita of the facility category, which is estimated based on the overall service population and the cost of new facilities required to serve new development. For example, in the next section the police facilities cost per capita is estimated at $475.72, therefore the police facilities impact fee for a 3-bedroom unit would be $1,327.26 (2.79 x $475.72). Note: this fee would be charged to any 3-bedroom unit regardless of whether it is considered a single-family house or a unit within an apartment building.

3. POLICE FACILITIES
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
16 3. POLICE FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for police facilities, vehicles, and equipment to accommodate new development. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for the funding of such facilities and vehicles.

Existing Police Facilities
The City of Pinole owns the Public Safety Building property described in Table 7. The Public Safety Building, at 880 Tennent Avenue. The Pinole Police Department provides law enforcement services to residents and workers of Pinole. Police vehicles and equipment are listed in the appendix.

Table 7 – Police Facilities and Equipment
Facility/Equipment Location
Floor/Lot
Area
Square
Feet
Current
Value1
Asset
Value per
Square
Foot
(appraisal)
Public Safety Building (Police portion) 880 Tennent Ave. 13,250 $7,727,238 $583 Police Station Parcel (portion) 10,900 $60,000
Vehicles and Equipment $516,100
1 One-half depreciated replacement value for Public Safety Building.

Source: City of Pinole City Property Report, 2019.

Police Facilities Service Population
The police facilities serve both residents and workers in the City of Pinole. Table 8 shows the estimated existing and projected service populations for 2024 and 2030, respectively. In calculating the service population, residents are given a weight of 1.0 and workers are weighted at 0.54 to reflect lower per capita service demand.1 Nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units, so it is reasonable to assume that average per-worker demand of services is less than average per-resident demand.

Table 8 – Police Service Population
Residents Workers
Factored
Workers
Service
Population
Existing (2024) 18,192 4,891 2,641 20,833
New Development (2024-2030) 1,120 2,466 1,332 2,452
Projected Total (2030) 19,312 7,357 3,973 23,285
Weighting Factor 1.00 0.54
Police Facilities Standards and Unit Costs
This section discusses the standard used to determine the future needs for police facilities. To ensure equity between the level of existing facilities and the facilities for which new development 1 Employment weighting based on a ratio of 45 hours in a work week (including lunch break) to 84 average daylight hours in a week: 45/84 =.54.

3. POLICE FACILITIES
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
17 may be required to fund, a per capita facility standard is used. The standard, as shown inable 9, is based on the existing standard method, which assumes that police facilities and vehicles will be needed to serve new development at the current ratio of police facilities to the resident and worker populations. This method is appropriate when the current facilities are deemed adequate to serve the current population. Use of the existing standard to calculate the impact fee ensures that new development pays only for the facilities that are equivalent to those provided to existing development. The police facilities standard is calculated in terms of the current value of the police station, vehicles, and equipment described in Table 7. The cost per capita represents the existing population’s investment in the facilities; charging this amount to new development ensures that there is equity between the existing and new populations.

Table 9 – Police Facilities Standard Cost Per Capita
Current
Value
2024
Service
Population
Facility
Standard Cost
per Capita
Police Station $7,727,238 20,833 $370.91
Police Station Land $60,000 20,833 $2.88
Current Vehicles & Equipment $516,100 20,833 $24.77
Total Facilities Cost per Capita: $398.56
Police Facilities Cost for New Development
Table 10 – Equipment for Incremental Officers Needed for Growth Officer Equipment, 1 set per officer $7,000
Patrol Vehicles, 3/5 per each officer $52,800
Total Cost $59,800
Additional officers for growth (see analysis below) 4
Incremental cost for new equipment $239,200
Projected Growth in Service Population 2,452
Per Capita Cost for Incremental Equipment $97.55
Current sworn officers (including Chief, sergeants and
commanders) 29
Current Service Population (Residents + Factored Workers) 20,833 Officers per 1,000 service population (current standard) 1.40 Projected Growth in Service Population 2,452
Additional officers for growth (rounded-up) 4
While no new police facilities are planned for the City of Pinole new development can be required to pay for existing facilities at a rate that is equivalent to the current population’s per capita share of investment in the existing facilities. In addition, new growth should cover the cost of adding new sworn officers to the Department that is needs to maintain the current level of service level for patrol and response, which is approximately 1.4 officers per 1,000 service population. Table 10 itemizes these costs and calculates the cost per capita for new development. Since the new officers are needed only serve the new population, the incremental cost is divided by the 2024-2030 service population growth to calculate the cost per capita attributed to growth.

3. POLICE FACILITIES
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
18 Table 11 shows the allocation of citywide police facility costs to new development. Future development is contributing at the same level per capita as existing development. This level of funding could be used to upgrade existing facilities, purchase vehicles, enhance communication systems, and/or perform facility refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code 66000.

Table 11 – Police Facilities Cost for New Development
Cost per Capita, current assets $398.56
Cost per Capita, incremental equipment $97.55
Total Cost per capita $471.72
Service Population Growth (2024-2030) 2,452
Total Cost to Serve Development $1,216,462
Fee Schedule
Table 12 shows the police facilities impact fee for new development based on the facilities cost per capita shown in Table 11. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the existing standard. Citywide residential and nonresidential development would pay the fee based on the service population estimated to be occupied by the land uses.

Table 12 – Police Facilities Proposed Fee Schedule
Land Use1
Weighting
factor
Costs per
Resident
or Worker Occupancy
Proposed
Fee
Current
Fee2
Residential, fee per number of bedrooms in unit
0 1.00 $496.11 1.23 $610.22 N/A
1 1.00 $496.11 1.75 $868.19 N/A
2 1.00 $496.11 2.27 $1,126.17 $1,000.98
3 1.00 $496.11 2.79 $1,384.15 $1,321.29
ADU1 1.00 $496.11 1.50 $992.22 N/A
Nonresidential, fee per square foot of floor area3
Office 0.54 $267.90 2.50 $0.67 $0.50
Commercial 0.54 $267.90 1.43 $0.38 $0.16
Industrial 0.54 $267.90 2.00 $0.54 $0.40
Institutional 0.54 $267.90 0.67 $0.18 $0.04
1 Throughout this report, for the purpose of comparison and reporting the projected revenues of the fee, the impact fee per ADU is calculated based on an occupancy of 1.50 persons per household.

The actual fee charged to an ADU will depend on the floor area of the permitted ADU, the impact fee may be zero or a proportion of impact fee charged to the primary dwelling unit in accordance with PMC 17.70.040
2 The proposed fee for a 2-bedroom unit is compared to the current multi-family fee, and the proposed fee for a 3-bedroom unit is compared to the current single-family fee. 3Occupancy factors for nonresidential are given per 1,000 square feet of floor area; the proposed fee is further divided by 1,000 to arrive at the fee per one square foot.

4. FIRE PROTECTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
19 4. FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for fire facilities to accommodate new development. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for funding of such facilities.

Fire Facilities Service Population
The Pinole fire protection facilities serve both residents and workers within the City of Pinole and the unincorporated areas of Tara Hills and Bayview. Table 13 shows the estimated existing and projected service populations for 2024 and 2030, respectively. In calculating the service population, residents are given a weight of 1.0 and workers are weighted at 0.54 to reflect lower per capita service demand. Nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units are, so it is reasonable to assume that average per-worker demand for services is less than average per-resident demand.

Table 13 – Fire Protection Service Population
2024
Residents Workers
Factored
Workers
Service
Population
Existing (2024) 18,192 4,891 2,641 20,833
New Development (2024-2030) 1,120 2,466 1,332 2,452
Projected Total (2030) 19,312 7,357 3,973 23,285
Weighting Factor 1.00 0.54
Existing Fire Facilities
The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (Con Fire) provides fire protection services to the residents and business of Pinole through a service agreement with the City. However, the City owns the facility and equipment listed in Table 14. Con Fire provides fire protection services, emergency medical services, rescue services, and fire prevention services to the City out of Fire Station 73 in a portion of the Public Safety Building shared with the Police Department and also Pinole Valley Response Station 74.

The fire stations and equipment included in the impact fees because they represent the integral capital investments needed to provide fire protection services to Pinole.

Table 14 – Fire Protection Inventory
Facility/Equipment
Current
Value
Public Safety Building (Fire Station No. 73 portion)1 $7,727,238 Pinole Valley Response Station (No. 74, 3700 Pinole Valley Road)1 $2,329,949 Land Area $108,000
Total Facilities: $10,165,187
Equipment 2024 Value
2015 Ford Explorer $9,843
Fire Apparatus $136,443
Type 1 Fire Engine $52,616
Equipment on-board $61,171
Total Equipment: $260,074
1 Depreciated replacement values; one-half of Public Safety Building Source: City of Pinole, City Property Report, 8/6/2018; Contra Costa County Assessor.

4. FIRE PROTECTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
20 Personal Protection Equipment
The projected growth in the service population will result in the need for two additional firefighters if the current ratio of firefighters to population is maintained. These additional personnel will require personal protection and communication equipment as estimated in Table 15.

Table 15 – Personal Fire Protection Equipment
Communications Equipment per Firefighter $2,500
Personal Protective Equipment per Firefighter $3,000
Total Cost per Firefighter $5,500
Additional Firefighters for Growth (see analysis below) 2 Incremental Cost for PPE $11,000
Projected Growth in Service Population 2,452
Cost per Capita $4.49
Current staffing: 6 Captains, 6 Engineers and 6 Firefighters 18 Current Service Population (Residents + Factored Workers) 20,833 Firefighters per 1,000 Service Population (current standard) 0.864 Projected Growth in Service Population 2,452
Additional Firefighters for Growth to 2030 2.0
Source: Cooperative Fire Service Agreement with CCCFPD, Contra Costa County LAFCO Report 22-07.

Fire Facilities Standards and Unit Costs
This section discusses the standard used to determine the future needs for fire facilities.

To ensure equity between the level of existing facilities and the facilities that new development should be responsible for, a per capita facility standard is used. The standard, as shown in Table 16, with some exceptions, is based on the existing standard method, which assumes that fire protection facilities and equipment will be needed to serve new development at the current ratio of fire facilities to the resident and worker populations. The exceptions are proposed upgrades to Fire Stations 73 and 74 and the addition of a new Tiller Truck (ladder truck) to the total asset value on which the impact fee is based. These additions are estimated to cost about $9.1 million and would be allocated proportionately to new and existing development.

Use of the existing standard to calculate the impact fee ensures that new development pays only for the facilities that are equivalent to those provided to existing development.

The value per capita for buildings, land, vehicles, and equipment is the current value of these assets serving the existing population. For the personal protection equipment, the incremental cost of for new equipment is added to new development’s cost per capita.

4. FIRE PROTECTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
21 Table 16 – Fire Protection Cost per Capita Standard
Current
Value/Cost
for New
Development
Service
Populations/Growth
in Service
Population
Value/Cost
per Capita
Fire Stations Buildings and Land $10,165,187 20,833 $487.94 Fire Station 73 Upgrade $3,000,000 23,285 $129.54
Fire Station 74 Upgrade $3,000,000 23,285 $129.54
New Tiller Truck1 $3,100,000 23,285 $133.86
Current Vehicles & Equipment $260,074 20,833 $12.48
Personal Protection Equipment $11,000 2,425 $4.73
Total per Capita: $895.72
*
The new Tiller truck is needed for expected new multi-story development but will also serve existing development equally.

Fire Facilities Cost for New Development
In addition to new (or upgraded) facilities future development can be required to pay for existing facilities at a rate that is equivalent to the current population’s per capita investment in the existing fire facilities and equipment. Table 17 shows the allocation of citywide fire protection facility costs to new development. Future development is contributing at the same level per capita as existing development. This level of funding could be used to upgrade existing facilities, purchase equipment and vehicles, enhance communication systems, and/or perform refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code 66000.

Table 17 – Fire Facilities Cost for New Development
Service Population Growth (2024-2030) 2,452
Total Cost per Capita $895.72
Total Cost to Serve New Development $2,088,059
Funding from other sources* $8,141,745
*Existing development’s share of the upgrades to the Fire Stations and the new Tiller Truck.

Fee Schedule
Table 18 shows the proposed fire protection facilities impact fee for new development based on the facilities cost per capita shown in Table 16. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the existing standard.

4. FIRE PROTECTION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
22 Table 18 – Proposed Fire Facilities Impact Fee
Land Use
Weighting
Factor
Cost per
Resident or
Worker
Occupancy
Factor
Proposed
Fee
Current
Fee1
Residential, fee per number of bedrooms in unit
0 1.00 $895.72 1.23 $1,101.74 N/A
1 1.00 $895.72 1.75 $1,567.51 N/A
2 1.00 $895.72 2.27 $2,033.28 $1,279.16
3 1.00 $895.72 2.79 $2,499.06 $1,688.49
ADU 1.00 $895.72 1.50 $1,791.44 N/A
Nonresidential, fee per square foot of floor
area
Office 0.54 $483.69 2.50 $1.21 $0.640
Commercial 0.54 $483.69 1.43 $0.69 $0.20
Industrial 0.54 $483.69 2.00 $0.97 $0.51
Institutional 0.54 $483.69 0.67 $0.32 $0.05
1The proposed fee for a 2-bedroom unit is compared to the current multi-family fee, and the proposed fee for a 3-bedroom unit is compared to the current singlefamily fee. The apparent reduction in fee is due to the lower occupancy factor for the bedroom analysis compared to the occupancy by unit type used in previous nexus study.

5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
23 5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
This chapter summarizes an analysis of the need for public facilities and equipment to accommodate new development. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for funding of such facilities.

Existing Municipal Facilities
The City of Pinole owns and operates the facilities listed in Tables 19 and 20. The public facilities service population is shown in Table 20. The current value of these buildings is determined by depreciating the estimated replacement cost, based on the year of construction or the last appraisal and a 50-year useful life. The complete calculations of current value are shown in the appendix.

Table 19 – Community Facilities Inventory
Facility Location
Building
Floor
Area
Square
Feet
Appraised
Building
Value
Land
Value
Youth, Recreational and Cultural Facilities
Memorial Hall/ Youth Center) 601-635 Tennent Ave. 9,553 $3,893,975 $1,146,276 Pinole Senior Center 2572 Charles Ave. 14,320 $5,283,367 $1,008,850 Pinole Swim Center/Tiny Tots
Day Care 2450 Simas Ave. 3,848 $1,461,065 $164,914
Totals: 27,721 $10,638,407 $2,320,040
Table 19 continued
Facility
Year Built/
Appraised
Useful
Life
Replacement
Cost
Accumulated
Depreciation
Current
Value
Memorial Hall/Youth Center 2019 50 $5,401,797 ($432,144) $4,969,653 Pinole Senior Center 2019 50 $7,329,188 ($586,335) $6,742,853 Pinole Swim Center/Tiny Tots
Day Care 2019 50 $2,026,817 ($162,145) $1,864,672
Total $13,557,178
Table 20 – Municipal Facilities Inventory
Facility Location
Floor Area
Square Feet
Appraised
Value
Land
Value
City Hall 2131 Pear Street 17,593 $7,786,125 $55,000
Post Office1 2101 Pear Street 4,560 $1,399,462 $309,810 Totals: 22,153 $9,185,587 $364,810
Table 20 continued
Facility
Year Built/
Appraised
Useful
Life
Replacement
Cost
Accumulated
Depreciation
Current
Value
City Hall 2017 50 $11,442,114 ($1,373,054) $10,069,060
Post Office1 2019 50 $1,941,360 ($155,309) $1,786,052
Total: $11,855,112
1 The post office building is owned by the City and leased to the US Postal Service.

5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
24 Public Facilities Service Population
The public facilities serve both residents and workers in the City of Pinole. Table 21 shows the estimated existing and projected service populations for 2024 and 2030, respectively. In calculating the service population, residents are given a weight of 1.0 and workers are weighted at 0.54 to reflect lower per capita service demand. Nonresidential buildings are typically occupied less intensively than dwelling units are, so it is reasonable to assume that average per-worker demand of services is less than average perresident demand.

Table 21 – Public Facilities Service Population
Residents Workers
Factored
Workers
Service
Population1
Existing (2024) 18,192 4,891 2,641 20,833
New Development (2024-2030) 1,120 2,466 1,332 2,452
Projected Total (2030) 19,312 7,357 3,973 23,285
Weighting Factor 1.00 0.54
Public Facilities Standards and Unit Costs
This section discusses the standard used to determine the future developments’ share of the costs of facilities for services related to the public facilities.

Per Capita Standards and Unit Costs
To ensure equity between the level of existing facilities and the facilities that new development should be responsible for, a per capita facility standard is used. The standard, as shown in Table 22, is based on the existing standard method, which assumes that public facilities, equipment, and vehicles will be needed to serve new development at the current ratio of the value of public facilities to the resident and worker populations. This method is appropriate when the current facilities are deemed adequate to serve the current population. Use of the existing standard to calculate the impact fee ensures that new development pays only for the facilities that are equivalent to those provided to existing development.

The current value of equipment and vehicles with a useful life of five years or more used by City departments, other than police, are listed in the appendix.

Table 22 – Public Facilities Current Values per Capita
Current Value
2024
Service
Population
Cost per
Capita at
Current Facility
Standard
Community & Municipal Buildings $25,432,289 20,833 $1,220.77 Land Value $2,684,850 20,833 $128.87
Equipment & Vehicles $1,826,479 20,833 $87.67
Total Facilities Cost per Capita: $1,437.31

5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
25 Public Facilities Cost for New Development
The City of Pinole, in its adopted Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP), calls for the installation of up to 270 electric vehicle charging stations by 2030 on city property and in public areas. This a CAAP transportation measure (TR-4) designed to help meet the City’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. The cost per connection for purchase and installation of DC fast chargers (DCFC) can be up to $150,000.1 The cost in Table 23 assumes 50 connections at an average cost of $100,000 per connection. The EV charging station installation cost could also be included with the Transportation impact fee since it meets the definition of a measure that will offset the carbon emissions of the vehicle miles traveled by new development. The inclusion in the Public Facilities chapter results in slightly lower per capita fee rate due to the different ways the percentage of cost allocated to growth is calculated (growth in vehicle trips vs. growth in service population). At the cost per capita given in Table 23, the fees from the new service population will generate approximately $550,000 to be used for EV Charging Stations, or about 11 percent of the cost of 50 connections, the other approximately $4,450,000 must be provided by sources other than the impact fee.

Table 23 – EV Charging Station Cost per Capita
New Facilities Units Per unit
Cost Total Cost Service Population1 Cost per Capita
EV Charging Stations 50 $100,000 $5,000,000 23,285 $214.73 1The cost of the charging stations is spread over the entire service population since the stations will benefit everyone.

Other than the EV charging stations, the City of Pinole has no current plans to add municipal or community facilities. However, new development can be required to pay for existing public facilities at a rate that is equivalent to the current population’s per capita share of investment in the existing facilities. Table 24 shows the total public facility costs to new development. Future development is contributing at the same level per capita as existing development. This level of funding could be used to upgrade existing facilities, purchase vehicles, enhance communication systems, and/or perform refurbishment within the parameters allowed by Government Code 66000.

Table 24 – Public Facilities Cost for New Development
Total Current Facilities Cost per Capita $1,437.31
EV Charging Stations $214.73
Total Cost per Capita $1,652.04
Service Population Growth, 2024-2030 2,452
Total Cost to Serve Growth $4,050,802
1 “Levelized Cost of Charging Electric Vehicles in the United States”, Joule Vol 4, Issue 7 July 15,2020 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s2542435120302312

5. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
26 Fee Schedule
Table 25 shows the proposed public facilities impact fee for new development based on the facilities cost per capita shown in Table 24. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the existing standard.

Table 25 – Proposed Public Facilities Impact Fee
Land Use1
Weighting
factor
Costs
per
Resident
& Worker Density2
Proposed
Fee
Current
Fee1
Residential, fee per number of bedrooms in unit
0 (studio) 1.00 $1,652.04 1.23 $2,032.01 N/A
1 1.00 $1,652.04 1.75 $2,891.07 N/A
2 1.00 $1,652.04 2.27 $3,750.13 $1,726.13
3 1.00 $1,652.04 2.79 $4,609.19 $2,278.48
ADU 1.00 $1,652.04 1.50 $3,304.08 N/A
Nonresidential, fee per square foot of floor area
Office 0.54 $892.10 2.50 $2.230 $0.863
Commercial 0.54 $892.10 1.43 $1.276 $0.276
Industrial 0.54 $892.10 2.00 $1.784 $0.690
Institutional 0.54 $892.10 0.67 $0.598 $0.069
1The proposed fee for a 2-bedroom unit is compared to the current multi-family fee, and the proposed fee for a 3-bedroom unit is compared to the current single-family fee.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
27 6. PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for parks and recreational facilities to accommodate new development. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the maximum justified impact fee for funding of such facilities.

Existing Parks and Recreation Facilities
The City of Pinole maintains neighborhood and community parks varying in size and distributed generally throughout the community. Most of the parks in the City are located within walking or biking distance of residential neighborhoods.

Neighborhood parks usually abut residential areas and include play areas, picnic areas, gathering areas, and open turf suitable for informal play, practices, or scrimmages. Community parks are generally designed to serve the needs of several neighborhoods or the whole community.

The City has 12 neighborhood and community parks in addition to a youth and senior center located at Fernandez Park. The City’s parks and their sizes and facilities are identified in Table 26. Total ground area of these facilities is approximately 54.2 acres. Bayfront Park is the largest park at nearly 20 acres.

The City also has extensive holdings of undeveloped, usable open space totaling over 227 acres. This acreage may be developed into active neighborhood or community parks or may be left in their current state, thereby providing a valuable resource amenity for residents. Table 27 lists the open space inventory. The value of open space acreage is assumed to be the land value listed for the parcel by the Contra Costa County Assessor.

Table 28 summarizes the value of stand-alone recreation facilities, which are included in calculating the per capita cost of current park and recreation facilities. These additional facilities are amenities not included in the park inventory, but which provide benefits to current and future residents.

6. PARKS AND RECREATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
28 Table 26 – Existing Developed Park Facilities Inventory Park Site Location
Net
Active
Park Area
(acres) Park Facilities
Bayfront Park 1 Tennent Ave. 19.42 Walking paths and trails along shoreline and Pinole Creek, two picnic tables,
benches, BBQ facilities, drinking fountain
and restroom facilities.

Fernandez Park 595 Tennent Ave. 4.62 Large playground, gazebo area, horseshoe pit, garden, tot lot, picnic
tables, two parking lots, BBQ facilities,
play area, restroom facilities, drinking
fountains, baseball field and basketball
court.

Pinole Valley Park 3790 Pinole Valley
Road

12.5 Two parking lots, one playground,
concession stand, restroom facilities,
drinking fountains, two soccer fields, one
baseball field, skate park, and one
basketball court. Hazel Downer-Thornton
Picnic Grove (1267 Adobe Road) has 4
picnic areas with tables and restrooms,
BBQ facilities, and drinking fountains with
a hiking trail that connects to the
Sobrante Ridge Regional Preserve. Large
and small dog parks.

Amber Swartz Park 3450 Savage
Avenue

3.95 Gazebo, walking path to Pinole Valley
Park and two benches located in the
gazebo.

Louis Francis Park 596 Marlesta
Drive

7.8 Picnic tables, 1 small BBQ pit, benches,
drinking fountain, playground, and sand
pad.

Meadow Park 1095 Nob Hill
Avenue

1.2 Public art, mosaic mural, new
playground, benches and basketball
courts.

Pinon Park 1600 Primrose
Lane

0.37 Picnic tables, benches, BBQ facilities,
and new play area.

Dog Park 1263 Adobe
Road

1.17 Parking, fencing and benches
Pinon Valley Tennis
Courts
2955 Pinole Valley
Road

0.76 Improvements listed in Table 27
Pinole Swim Center
& Tiny Tots Center
2450 Simas Ave. 1.7 Improvements listed in Table 18
Canyon Drive Park 1822 Canyon
Drive

0.47 Play area, picnic tables and benches
Pinole Valley Picnic
Grove
3790 Pinole Valley
Road

0.2 Picnic tables and benches
Total 54.16

6. PARKS AND RECREATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
29 Table 27 – Existing Open Space Inventory
Location
Open
Space
Acres
Assessor's
Parcel Number
Assessor’s Land
Value, 2024
Pinole Valley Park (parcel 1) 34.83 360-210-001 $75,079 Pinole Valley Park (parcel 2) 134.92 360-210-006 $293,891 Pinole Valley Park (parcel 3) 34.04 360-210-002 $73,991 Hugh Young Park 7.92 360-392-010 $72,049
Henry Ave. Public Open Space 10.82 401-230-016 $1,756
View Park, 2021 Henry Ave. 2.73 401-461-053 $469
Sarah Drive Park 1.75 430-330-014 $188,499
Totals: 227.01 $705,734
Current Residential Population 18,192 18,192
Level of Service (acres per 1,000 population) 12.48
Open Space Land Value per Capita $38.79
Source: Contra Costa County Tax Assessor
Table 28 – Other Recreation Improvements
Swim Center Pool Complex (land value included in
Community Facilities) $1,863,939
Pinole Valley Park caretakers building (1270 Adobe) $1,156,548 Pinole Valley Road restroom, bleachers & concessions $380,513 Pinole Valley Tennis Center, 2955 Pinole Valley Road $400,000 Total Other Recreation Improvements: $3,801,000
Current Residential Population 18,192
Open Space Land Value per Capita $208.94
Source: 2023 City Property List-Appraised Values
Table 29 summarizes the current park standard in the City of Pinole Table 29 – Park Level of Service Standards
Park Inventory
Active
Park Acres
Developed Park Acreage 54.16
2024 Population: 18,192
Active park acres per 1,000 population: 2.98
Park Cost Estimate
To establish the value of one acre of developed park, a park cost estimate is used based on a typical 5- acre neighborhood park, including land acquisition. The estimate is provided in Table 30. The amenities included in this typical park are equivalent to those found in the City’s existing parks.

6. PARKS AND RECREATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
30 Table 30 – Cost Estimate for a Typical Park
Item Description Quantity Unit
Unit
Cost Item Cost
Mobilization 1.00 Lump Sum $50,000 $50,000
Off-site Improvements (curb & gutter 1/2 street
width) 500 Lineal Feet $250 $125,000
Site Prep, Drainage, Utilities, Irrigation & Turf, Shade Trees 5.00 Acres $300,000 $1,500,000
Multipurpose Fields 1 Each $120,000 $120,000
Basketball Court (1 Concrete) 1 Each $60,000 $60,000
Concrete Walkways (4' x 6' wide, perimeter of site) 1,900 Lineal Feet $35 $66,500 Play Apparatus $90,000 $90,000
Open Field Play Area 1 Lump Sum $25,000 $25,000
Group Picnic Shelter and Barbecue Facilities 1 Lump Sum $75,000 $75,000 Permanent Restrooms (one each male and
female) 2 Each $250,000 $500,000
Parking Lot (3" AC/4" AB) 0.5 Acres $400,000 $200,000
Total Construction $2,811,500
Land Acquisition (cost per acre based on $8 per
square foot in accordance with Municipal Code
Sec.16.28.060, fee in-lieu of park land dedication) 5 Acres $348,480 $1,742,400 Contingency @ 20% $562,300
Engineering @ 12% $337,380
CM & Inspection @ 10% $281,150
City Administration @ 4% (1% design, 1% construction, 2% overhead) $112,460 Environmental @3% $84,345
Total Non-Construction $1,377,635
Project Total w/Land Acquisition $5,939,135
Total Cost per Acre $1,186,307
Parks and Recreation Standards and Unit Costs
This section discusses the standard used to determine the standard for parks and recreation facilities.

Per Capita Standards and Unit Costs
Park standards are typically stated in terms of parkland per 1,000 population. The standard for Pinole, shown in Table 31, is based on total developed parks. This table also shows the asset value per capita for other existing recreation facilities and open space.

Table 31 – Park Facility Standards and Costs per Capita Current Population 18,192
Current Active Park Acreage 54.16
Park Standard Acres per 1,000 Residents 2.98
Service Population Growth, 2024-2030 1,120
Park Acreage Required for Growth (1,120 x 2.98) 3.34
Cost per Acre $1,186,307
New Park Cost to Serve Growth $3,962,265
Park per Capita Cost (New Park Costs/Population Growth) $3,537.74 Open Space Cost per Capita $38.79
Other Recreation Facilities $208.94
Total Cost per Capita for Parks, Open Space and Recreation $3,785.47

6. PARKS AND RECREATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
31 Parks and Recreation Cost for New Development
New development can be required to provide its proportionate share of facilities related to new development at the existing rate per 1,000 population. Table 32 shows the citywide parks and recreation facility cost for new development.

Table 32 – Park Cost for New Development
Residential Population Growth (2024-2030) 1,120
Cost per Capita $3,785.47
Total Cost for New Development
$4,239,726.4
0 Fee Schedule
Table 33 shows the parks and recreation impact fee for new development based on the facilities cost per capita shown in Table 31. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund all new park and recreation facilities needed to accommodate growth based on the existing facility standard.

Table 33 – Proposed Park Impact Fee
Land Use
Cost per
Capita
Occupants
per Unit
Proposed
Fee per
Unit
Current
Fee
Residential, fee per number of bedrooms in Unit
0 (studio) $3,785.47 1.23 $4,656.13 N/A
1 $3,785.47 1.75 $6,624.57 N/A
2 $3,785.47 2.27 $8,593.02 $6,981.71
3 $3,785.47 2.79 $10,561.46 $9,215.85
ADU $3,785.47 1.50 $7,570.94 N/A
1The proposed fee for a 2-bedroom unit is compared to the current multifamily fee, and the proposed fee for a 3-bedroom unit is compared to the current single-family fee.

Dedication of Park Land and Park Impact Fees
The City’s Parkland Dedication Ordinance (PDO) (Municipal Code Section 16.28) requires, as a condition of approval for the subdivision of land, the dedication of parkland or payment of a fee in lieu of dedication, pursuant to California Government Code Section 66477 (the Quimby Act). The Quimby Act allows the City to require the dedication of land for park purposes up to the rate of 3 acres per 1,000 expected occupants.

The City may collect the full AB 1600 park impact fees for park acquisition and development at the issuance of occupancy permits but may not impose the land dedication requirement at the subdivision stage. The City may collect on either the PDO or the impact fee, but not both.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
32 7. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for transportation facilities, which include arterial roadway and intersection improvements, to serve new development through 2030. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the impact fee for funding of these facilities.

Transportation Facilities Standards
Level of Service with New Development
The level of service (LOS) provided by the current road network under the land use conditions projected at General Plan buildout was estimated using the Contra County Transportation Authority’s (CCTA) regional traffic model.

The definitions of the LOS measures are:

A. Traffic flowing freely (volume to capacity ratio (v/c =0.50 to 0.59) B. Generally unimpeded traffic flow (v/c = 0.60 to 0.69) C. Slower but stable flow with minor delays (v/c = 0.70 to 0.79) D. Reduced speeds and increased delays (v/c = 0.80 to 0.89) E. Slow speeds and significant delays (v/c = 0.90 to 0.99) F. Stop-and-go traffic, high level of delay (v/c > 1.00) The CCTA model shows that intersections along key corridors serving Pinole, such as San Pablo Avenue, Appian Way, and Pinole Valley Road, would fall to LOS E or F. Nine intersections would fall to LOS F and one to LOS E by 2030. In addition to Pinole’s expected growth, these intersections are also impacted by the projected growth in the surrounding jurisdictions.

Transportation Demand from New Development
Table 34 shows transportation demand that would be generated by new development from 2024 to 2030.

The total demand for new facilities across all land use types, is based on the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for all types of residential development and the major categories of nonresidential development. For residential development, a VMT per person of 18.61 is used. This value was determined by dividing the total home-based VMT for Contra Costa County in 2023 by the County’s household population in 2023.1 To make the Transportation fee schedule consistent with the other facilities in this study, the VMT per person is used to calculate the VMT per unit using occupancy by number of bedrooms as shown in Table

6. AB-602 Compliance
The transportation demand generated by existing and new residential development is estimated by using bedrooms per unit and not floor area as would be required to be in strict compliance with AB-602. This is 1 Fehr & Peers, 2023; Contra Costa Travel Model, 2023, Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

7. TRANSPORTATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
33 another situation where, due to the available data, the analysis is not conducive to a fee per square foot of floor area. The Institute of Transportation Engineering, which is the primary source of trip generation estimates for land use, only reports residential trip rates by type of development—i.e. single family, apartments, condominiums etc. Therefore, the VMT-based method is used to calculate the fee for both residential and commercial development. This method also conforms to SB-743 by using VMT as the metric to evaluate transportation impacts. This study adapts the ITE nonresidential trip generation rates by applying a standard miles per trip factor depending on the land use, as shown in Table 34.

For purposes of this fee study, all current and future trips on City of Pinole streets are treated as if they are generated from either a city residence or place of business. New development outside of Pinole that generates trips on Pinole streets cannot be charged the impact fee. Therefore, those trips that originate and/or end outside the City of Pinole are considered a part of “existing development” whose share of roadway capital improvements must be borne by the City or be funded by sources other than the impact fee.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
34 Table 34 – Transportation Demand 2024-2030
Land Use1
2024
Existing
Growth
2024-
2030 Total
VMT per
Occupant
or per 1,000
sq. ft.

Pass-by
Factor
2024
VMT VMT Growth
2030
VMT
Residential (dwelling units)
Total Units 6,873 435 7308
Household Occupancy Rate 2.647 2.529 2.640
Residential Population 18,192 1,120 19,312 18.61 1.00 338,556 20,843 359,399 Nonresidential (in square feet)4
Office 909,740 512,466 1,422,206 80 0.75 54,584 30,748 85,332 Commercial/Retail 1,009,926 431,088 1,441,014 210 0.60 127,251 54,317 181,568 Industrial 476,283 -113,295 589,578 120 0.90 51,439 12,236 63,674 Institutional 1,086,000 0 1,086,000 90 0.95 92,853 0 92,853 326,127 97,301 423,427
Total 664,683 118,144 782,826
Percentage 2030 VMT from Growth 15.09%
1Nonresidential trip generation rates per the Institute of Transportation Engineering Trip Generation 7th Edition 2008:

General office building/Office Park: 10 trips per 1,000 sq. ft x 8 miles per trip Commercial: 35 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. (as typical shopping center) x 6 miles per trip General Light Industrial: 10 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. x 10 miles per trip Institutional (government office complex): 9 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. x 10 miles per trip VMT rates are further adjusted with pass-by factors, which adjust for original trips stopping at interim destinations.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
35 SB-743 Impact on Use of Intersection Level of Service Passed by the California legislature in September 2013, SB-743 removed LOS as a standard of significance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The legislation called for the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to revise the CEQA Guidelines and provide an alternative measure for determining the impact of new development and transportation improvements. The rationale for the change in traffic impact analysis under CEQA is that with land development such as redevelopment or within infill locations, LOS standards, due to the incremental nature of cumulative impacts, primarily impact the “last in” or the latest development to occur in these locations and exaggerated their relative impact, while earlier developments, because of their comparatively small size, typically do not exceed the LOS threshold standard. As part of its initial discussion paper on the change in CEQA guidelines issued in July 2014, OPR recommended the use of VMT as the new measure that would serve as the replacement for LOS. VMT could be measured on a per capita basis (in this study the per capita VMT is given as 18.61) or is calculated for the entire project. SB-743 encourages transportation improvement projects that reduce overall VMT on the local network and would provide mitigation for the VMT projected to be added by land development projects. By the nature of the land development proposed in Pinole, particularly in the Three Corridors Specific Plans, VMT is expected to be lower than the more extensive suburban alternatives. Therefore, the transportation improvement projects included in this study are a combination of measures designed to reduce VMT and improve LOS. The City of Pinole adopted “Walk and Roll PinoleActive Transportation Plan” (ATP) in December 2023. The ATP includes measures designed to reduce VMT.

Table 35 includes the following projects referenced in the ATP has relevant to the goal of reducing VMT. • Arterial Rehabilitation
• Tennent Ave Rehabilitation
• Appian Way Complete Streets
• Pedestrian Improvements at Tennent
Ave near railroad tracks
• Hazel Street Gap Closure
• Safety Improvements at Appian Way &
Marlesta Road
• Smart Signals
Transportation Improvements Cost for New Development
Planned Projects
Improvements on circulation element streets were identified in the City’s 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Plan and are listed in Table 35. These improvements provide for a complete range of mobility enhancements that would benefit existing and new development. New development’s share of the cost of these improvements is limited to the 12.48 percent of the 2030 VMTs that are attributable to growth estimated to occur during the period 2024-2030.

7. TRANSPORTATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
36 Table 35 – Transportation Improvements
Capital Improvements
Project Cost
(2024)
Other
Designated
Funding1
Local
Funding
San Pablo Avenue Bridge over BNSF2 $30,774,162 $1,974,162 $3,692,899 San Pablo Avenue Rehabilitation $662,000 $586,000 $76,000 Safety Improvement at Appian Way and
Marlesta $679,429 $129,000 $550,429
Safety Improvements on Arterial Roadways $275,000 $275,000 Tennant Avenue Rehabilitation $682,805 $488,493 $194,312 Arterial Rehabilitation $1,686,845 $896,963 $789,882
Hazel Street Gap Closure $200,000 $200,000
Pedestrian Improvements on Tennent Ave.
near Railroad $1,406,672 $44,700 $1,361,972
Street Paving Equipment $395,000 $395,000
Smart Signals $154,302 $154,302
Appian Way Complete Street $1,070,000 $1,070,000
Total Local Funding for Planned Improvements: $8,759,796 1 Includes Gas Tax, grant funds, measure funds, etc.
2 Local funding for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge is capped at 12% as local match for grant funding Source: City of Pinole, 5-year CIP 2024-2028
Transportation Improvement Costs Per VMT
The total cost per VMT for the transportation improvement projects is shown in Table 36.

Table 36 – Transportation Improvements Cost per VMT
Roadway Capital Improvement Costs (Local Share) $8,759,796 2024 VMT’s 664,683
2024 - 2030 VMT's 118,144
2030 VMT’s 782,826
Percentage 2030 VMT from Growth 15.09%
Local Share Allocated to Growth $1,321,853
Cost per 2024-2030 VMT $11.19
New development can be required to provide its proportionate share of transportation improvements that enhance mobility within the city and reduce VMT. Table 36 shows the allocation of citywide transportation system costs to new development. Future development is contributing at the same rate as existing development, at $11.19 per VMT. In this case, existing and future development would include traffic impacts outside the City of Pinole. Therefore, the City will need to seek regional funds from sources such as the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, Congestion Management, Measure J, or a regional impact fee program to meet the demands placed on local arterials by development growth outside the City.

Fee Schedule
Table 37 shows the Transportation facilities impact fee for new development based on the road improvements cost per VMT shown in Table 36. The fee represents the amount required to fully fund

7. TRANSPORTATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
37 roadway improvements needed to accommodate growth. Citywide residential and nonresidential developments in the City would pay the fee based on the VMT for the improvements identified.

Table 37 – Proposed Transportation Impact Fee
Land Use1
Cost
per
VMT
Average VMTs
per Occupant
or per 1,000 sq.
ft.

Occupants
per Unit
Proposed
Fee per
Unit
Current
Fee1
Residential, fee per bedrooms in units
0 $11.19 18.61 1.23 $256.14 N/A
1 $11.19 18.61 1.75 $364.43 N/A
2 $11.19 18.61 2.27 $472.72 $338.71
3 $11.19 18.61 2.79 $581.01 $477.05
ADU $11.19 18.61 1.50 $312.37 N/A
Nonresidential, fee per square foot of floor area
Office $11.19 60.00 N/A $0.67 $0.64
Commercial $11.19 126.00 N/A $1.41 $1.60
Industrial $11.19 108.00 N/A $1.21 $0.42
Institutional $11.19 85.50 N/A $0.96 $1.21
1The proposed fee for a 2-bedroom unit is compared to the current multi-family fee, and the proposed fee for a 3-bedroom unit is compared to the current singlefamily fee.

The VMT per 1,000 sq. ft. for nonresidential uses is adjusted by the pass-by factor for the given use.

The proposed nonresidential fees per square foot for commercial and institutional are less than the current fee rates due to the way VMT’s are calculated for nonresidential uses, by incorporating a miles per trip factor.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
38 8. DRAINAGE FACILITIES
This chapter summarizes the analysis of the need for drainage facilities to accommodate new development. This chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the impact fee for funding of such facilities.

Drainage facilities serve both residential and nonresidential development. Table 38 summarizes the impacts of existing and new development on the City’s drainage system in terms of the increase in impervious land area that is tributary to the system due to new development.

Drainage Impacts of Existing and New Development
Table 38 analyses existing and new development in terms of the change in developed acreage since land use is generally stated in terms of acres. To link acreage with drainage impacts, the acreage values are adjusted by an impervious land factor for each land use type. This factor represents the portion of land that does not allow for infiltration of rainfall. For example, the 0.50 factor for single-family homes includes the roof, patio covers, driveway, other hardscaped areas, indicating that a typical single-family parcel is covered by 50 percent impervious area. The higher the percentage of impervious land in an area the more runoff will occur which results in the need for more drainage infrastructure.

Table 38 shows the General Plan land use types consolidated into a few major categories: single and multifamily in residential land use and office, commercial industrial and public/institutional in the nonresidential categories. This consolidation is done to forecast the change in developed acreage more easily with the fewest number of assumptions. In addition, to there being many other types of land use, development projects may include a mix of uses—for example commercial and/or retail businesses plus some multi-family units. But whether a parcel develops with a mix of uses does not factor into the analysis since it is the impervious area of the project that is key to the calculation of the fee. A relatively large parcel may include many buildings with multiple floors, parking areas, landscaping, and hardscape, which all must be evaluated to determine the total impervious area on which to apply the fee.

Note that in this study the assumption is made that most of the growth in multifamily housing will, by necessity, come about via redevelopment to multi-story construction on currently developed "opportunity" sites, primarily within the Three Corridors Specific Plan Area. Therefore, the projected overall increase in developed land area is relatively small, only about 3.5 percent of the total development footprint in 2030 to accommodate over 400 new dwelling units and about 560,000 square feet of nonresident floor area.

AB-602 Compliance
In Table 38 converts the impervious developed acreage to impervious square feet by multiplying acreage by 43,560. In this way the drainage fee may be charged per square foot of project area as required by AB602.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
39 Table 38 – Drainage Impacts
Land Use1
Existing
Developed
Acres
Projected
Growth of
Developed
Acreage
2024-20301
Total
2030
Impervious
Factor2
Impervious
Area
(acres)
2024
Total
Impervious
(acres)
2030
Growth in
Impervious
Area (acres)
2024-2030
Growth in
Impervious
Area (sq. ft.)
2024-2030
Residential (in acres)
Single Family3 1,477 6 1,483 0.50 739 742 3 108,900
Multi-family3 211 27 238 0.80 169 190 21 914,760
1,688 33 1,721 908 932 24 1,023,660
Non-residential (in acres)4
Office5 35 6 41 0.80 28 33 5 217,800
Retail/Commercial/
Food Service
230 20 250 0.80 184 200 16 696,960
Industrial 17 9 26 0.95 16 24 8 348,480
Public/Institutional 110 0 110 0.75 83 83 0 0
392 35 427 311 340 29 1,263,240
Total Acres 2,080 68 2,148 1,219 1,271 53
Total Square Feet 53,099,640 55,386,540 2,286,900
2024-2030 growth as a percentage 2030 impervious area 4.13 1 This analysis assumes the availability of vacant land that is identified in the land use data compiled for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

Redevelopment of currently developed parcels is assumed to occur at generally higher densities than current development. Details of the land use acreage assumptions are in the Appendix.
2 Impervious factors are related to the C coefficient in the rational runoff formula: Q=CIA, for the respective land uses. 3 Single family acreage increase is based on 30 single family homes at an assumed average density of 5 units per acre. 4The growth shown for multi-family is based on an average density of 14 units per acre or 27 acres to accommodate 375 new units shown in Table 6. Most of the growth in multi-family housing will, by necessity, come via development on currently developed "opportunity" sites and multi-story construction.
*

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
40 Planned Drainage Improvements
The City’s Capital Improvement Plan lists drainage projects for the fiscal years 2024-2028, as shown on Table 39. These projects will serve existing and new development.

Table 39 – Drainage Improvements
Storm Drain Improvements 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Total Storm Drain Master Plan $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $75,000 Hazel Street Drainage $440,098 $440,098
Roble Road Drainage $700,000 $700,000
Stormwater System Rehabilitation $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,200,000 $1,950,000 Total Cost $3,215,098
Drainage Facility Impact Costs Per Acre
The total cost per impervious acre for the drainage improvement projects is shown in Table 40.

Table 40 – Drainage Improvements per Impervious Acre
Drainage Capital Improvement Costs $3,215,098
Total Impervious Square Feet 2024 53,099,640
2024-2030 Growth in Impervious Square Feet 2,286,900
Total Impervious Square Feet 2030 55,386,540
Percentage of 2030 Square Feet from Growth 4.13%
Cost for New Development $132,783.55
Cost per Impervious Square Foot $0.06
Cost to Existing Development $3,082,314
Drainage Facilities Standards and Unit Costs
New development can be required to provide its proportionate share of drainage facilities related to new development. Table 40 shows the allocation of citywide drainage facilities costs to new development.

Future development is contributing at the same rate per impervious acre as existing development.

Fee Schedule
Table 41 shows the proposed drainage facilities impact fee schedule for new development based on the facilities cost per impervious square foot shown in Table 40. Residential “example” fees are shown for comparison with the current fees charged to residential units. These examples are based on the density and impervious area assumptions for typical single and multi-family homes, 5 and 14 aces per unit, respectively. In keeping with AB-602, an actual project would be charged the fee based on the impervious area of the project.

8. DRAINAGE
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
41 Table 41 – Proposed Drainage Impact Fee
Land Use
Parcel
area per
Unit in
Square
Feet1
Impervious
Factor
Drainage
Improvement
Cost per
Impervious
Square Foot
Example
Fees for
Typical
Project
Current
Fee
Residential, example fee per dwelling unit
Single Family2 8,712 0.50 $0.06 $261.36 $1,270.54
Multifamily 3 3,111 0.80 $0.06 $149.33 $76.23
Nonresidential, example fee per square foot of floor area 4 Office 2,000 0.80 $0.06 $0.10 $0.19
Commercial 2,000 0.80 $0.06 $0.10 $0.19
Industrial 3,333 0.95 $0.06 $0.19 $0.37
Public/Institutional 5,000 0.75 $0.06 $0.23 $0.44
1 Parcel area is the entire ground area on which the development is constructed. It is given as square feet per dwelling unit for residential and for 1,000 square feet of constructed enclosed floor area for nonresidential.
2Single family parcel area per unit is based on an assumed average density of 5 units per acre (43,560/5).
2Multi-family parcel area per unit is based on an average density of 14 units per acre. 4Nonresidential parcel area per 1000 square feet of nonresidential floor area is based on assumed floor area ratios of 0.5 for office and commercial, 0.30 for industrial, and 0.2 for public/institutional.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
42 9. IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter identifies tasks that the City should complete when implementing the fee program, including adoption of increased fees.

Impact Fee Program Adoption Process
Impact fee program adoption procedures are found in the California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. Adoption of an impact fee program and increasing impact fees both require the City Council to follow certain procedures, including holding a public hearing. Mailed notice 14 days prior to the public hearing is required only for those individuals who request such notification. Data, such as this impact fee report, and referenced material must be made available at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. The City’s legal counsel should inform the City of any other procedural requirements as well as advice regarding adoption of an enabling ordinance and/or a resolution. After adoption, there is a mandatory 60-day waiting period before the fees and increased fee may go into effect, unless an urgency ordinance, valid for 30 days, is adopted making certain findings regarding the urgency being claimed. In this case, the ordinance must be readopted at the end of the first period (and possibly at the end of the second period depending on City Council meeting dates) to cover the next 30 days and therefore the entire 60-day waiting period. Fees adopted by urgency go into effect immediately. This procedure must also be followed for fee increases.

Programming Revenues and Projects with the Capital Improvement Plan Section 66002 states that a local agency may adopt a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that indicates the approximate location, size, date of construction, and estimates of cost for all facilities or improvements to be financed with the impact fees. If a CIP is referenced in this manner and used to identify specific projects and program fee revenues to be applied to those projects, the City must annually update and adopt the CIP by a resolution of the governing body at a noticed public hearing. Use of the CIP in this manner documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues.

For the five-year planning period of the CIP, the City should allocate all existing fund balances and projected fee revenue to facilities projects. The City can hold funds in a project account for longer than five years, if necessary, to collect sufficient funds to complete a project.

Funds Needed to Complement Impact Fee Program
In adopting the fees as presented in this report, additional funds will need to be identified to fund the share of costs not related to new development. Table 3 identifies the facilities studied in this report and the funding sources for the facilities. The “General Fund/Other Sources” column identifies the additional funding that the City needs to obtain for the facilities shown to cover the City’s share related to existing development.

Inflation Adjustment
The costs in this report are shown in 2024 dollars based on construction cost estimates. To ensure that the fee program stays current with costs, the City should identify appropriate inflation indexes in the fee ordinance and include an automatic annual inflation adjustment in the fee ordinance for those facilities

9. IMPLEMENTATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
43 or systems that have not been completed. In addition, for those facilities for which the City is recouping funds for building excess capacity, no annual adjustment factor is recommended. For these projects, the annual adjustment factor is not necessary because the facilities have been constructed and the costs determined.

A construction cost index can be based on the City’s recent capital project experience or taken from any reputable source, such as the Engineering News-Record.

Combining Fees
Each facility category has been presented separately for the purpose of analysis and reporting. However, fees may be combined into two or more fee categories at the City’s discretion, to facilitate administration.

Compliance Requirements
The California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) mandates procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection, accounting, refunds, updates, and reporting.

The City should comply with the annual and five-year reporting requirements. For facilities to be funded with a combination of impact fees and other revenues, the City must identify the source and amount of the other revenues. The City must also identify when the other revenues are anticipated to be available to fund the project. The City’s compliance obligations vis-à-vis the Act include but are not limited to the following specific requirements:

Collection of fees. Section 66007 provides that a local agency shall not require payment of fees by developers of residential projects prior to the date of final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever comes first. In a residential development of more than one dwelling unit, the City may choose to collect fees either for individual units or for phases upon final inspection, or for the entire project upon final inspection of the first dwelling unit when it is completed.

Fee exemptions, reductions, and waivers. If a development project is found to have no impact on facilities for which fees are charged, such project must be exempted from the fees. If a project has characteristics that indicate its impacts on a public facility or infrastructure system will be significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact used to calculate impact fees in this study, the fees should be reduced accordingly.

In some cases, the City may desire to voluntarily waive or reduce impact fees that would otherwise apply to a project to promote goals such as affordable housing or economic development. Such a waiver or reduction may not result in increased costs to other development projects and are allowable only if the City offsets the lost revenue from other fund sources.

Credit for improvements by developers. If the City requires a developer, as a condition of approval, to construct facilities or improvements for which impact fees have been or will be charged, the impact fee imposed on that development project for that type of facility must be adjusted to reflect a credit for the cost of facilities or improvements constructed by the developer. If the reimbursement would exceed the amount of the fee to be paid by the development for that type of facility, the City may seek to negotiate a reimbursement agreement with the developer.

9. IMPLEMENTATION
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
44 Earmarking of fee revenues. Section 66006 mandates that the City shall “deposit …. fees for the improvement in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the City, except for temporary investments.” Fees must be expended solely for the purpose for which they were collected. Interest earned on the fee revenues must also be placed in the capital account and used for the same purpose. The Act is not clear as to whether depositing fees “for the improvements” refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements (e.g., park facilities). Recommended practice for the City is to maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facility category, but not necessarily for individual projects.

Reporting. Section 66006 requires that once each year, within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, the local agency must make available to the public the following information for each account established to receive impact fee revenues:

1. The amount of the fee.

2. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund.

3. The amount of the fees collected, and interest earned.

4. Identification of each public improvement on which fee revenues were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fee revenues.

5. Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public improvement will commence, if the City determines sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement.

6. A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the improvements on which the transfer or loan will be expended.

7. The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Section 66001, paragraphs (e) and (f).

The above information must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public.

Findings and refunds. Section 66001 requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by Section 66006, and every five years thereafter, the local agency shall make all the following findings for any fee revenues that remain unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:

1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put.

2. Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged.

3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements for which the impact fees are to be used.

4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate account of fund.

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
45 APPENDIX
Municipal Equipment and Vehicles
Division Item Asset Value
Cable TV 1995 GMC Van $9,890
Parks 1991 BRUSH BANDIT Chipper $7,310
2001 CHEVROLET 1500 4x4 $15,390
1994 FORD F-350 $14,620
Public Works 1980 KUBOTA Tractor $2,185
1984 KUBOTA Tractor $5,280
2005 KUBOTA F2560-R 4WD w/front mount mower $17,800
2020 Kubota Track Loader K94250 $60,000
DITCHWITCH Trencher $2,910
1992 STANLEY HYD. Trailer $7,310
1993 XHL-Double Trailer $3,295
UT-912 TRIPLE L Trailer $6,935
2006 CHEVROLET $13,880
1999 FORD E350 Step Van $16,344
2006 FORD F250 $16,800
2008 FORD F250 $18,000
2008 FORD F250 4x4 $18,500
2016 FORD F250 $20,000
2016 FORD F250 $20,000
2004 CHEVROLET C3500 2/3 yd dump body $20,360
2006 STERLING Hydro-flusher $131,160
2000 DODGE Cab & Chassis $13,395
2022 CASE 580 4WD Loader w/Bucket $45,030
2022 Kenworth Dump Truck $75,000
1983 Zieman Trailer $2,000
1994 BIG Trailer $3,000
2006 Carson Carrier Trailer $6,000
2019 ALTEC F550 Chipper Dump Truck $25,000
2019 Elgin Whirlwind Sweeper $120,000
2020 Toyota Prius Code Enforcement $20,000
2021 Freightliner M2 106 Patch Paving Truck $250,000
2022 Freightliner Vac-Con $290,000
2021 Ford Super Duty $35,000
2022 Ford Super Duty $38,000
2019 Craftco Crack Seal Trailer $18,000
1991 FORD F700 $26,390
Wastewater Treatment 2002 FORD F250 $15,390
HYSTER H60XM Forklift $16,370
2005 FORD F250 $19,745
2006 FORD F250 $24,845
1997 FORD Truck/Crane $40,900
2005 Ford Taurus $5,000
2022 Kenworth 3-Axel Truck $120,000
2022 Kenworth 3-Axel Truck $120,000
Total equipment: $1,757,034

City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
46 Police Equipment and Vehicles
Asset ID
Unit
No. Year Make Model Color Status Plate VIN Asset Value
8008110344 801 2016 Ford Explorer 1355277 1FM5K8AR6GGB81291 $15,000 8008110326 802 2014 Ford Taurus Blk/Wht Patrol E1325641 1FAHP2MK3EG170458 $8,000 8008110324 803 2011 Ford Crown Victoria Blk/Wht Patrol E1301237 2FABP7BV7BX185891 $11,000 8008110323 804 2011 Ford Crown Victoria Blk/Wht Patrol E1301235 2FABP7BV9BX185892 $11,000 8008110358 805 2017 Ford Explorer Black K9 TBD 1FM5K8AR1HGB93026 $17,000 8008110325 806 2013 Ford Explorer Blk/Wht Patrol-Sgts. E1301236 1FM5K8AR6DGC21090 $14,500 8008110330 807 2015 Ford Taurus Black Patrol-MDC 1325722 1FAHP2MKXFG115152 $8,500 8008110322 808 2010 Ford Crown Victoria Blk/Wht Patrol-MDC E1329148 2FABP7BV3AX107199 $10,500 8008110329 810 2014 Ford Explorer Black Patrol-Sgts. 1325721 1FM5K8AR8EGC15261 $15,000 00000004 811 2017 Ford Explorer Black Patrol E1340001 1FM5K8ARXHGE14803 $17,000 8008110357 812 2017 Ford Explorer Black Patrol E1355300 1FM5K8AR3HGB54633 $17,000 8008110321 813 2009 Ford Crown Victoria Blk/Wht Patrol Canine Reserve
E1316352 2FAHP71V89X142425 $6,500
8008110216 820 1997 Ford Expedition White Traffic E339231 1FMFU18L5VLC08816 $3,000 8008110317 821 2009 Harley
Davidson
FLHP Motorcycle Black Patrol E3000601 1HD1FHM1X9Y617729 $7,250 00000006 822 2017 Zero Motorcycle DSRP 13.0 Black
Traffic
E3008908 538SDBZ9HC08636 $11,000
00000015 831 2018 Ford Explorer Black Police Chief 8BUZ966 1FM5K8AR8JGA83600 $18,000 8008110255 851 2003 Ford Crown Victoria Blue Pool 4XJC312 2FAFP71W83X136471 $3,500 8008110300 852 2007 Pontiac Grand Prix Gray Investigations 5ZUX652 2G2WP552071127234 $5,000 8008110286 857 2006 Dodge Charger Grey H.I.T.E. 5MOZ689 2B3KA53H16H255170 $5,000 8008110308 858 2008 Dodge Charger Black Police Chief 6DDX996 2B3LA43H48H252300 $6,500 8008110284 859 2006 Ford Crown Victoria Blk/Wht Patrol-MDC E1218072 2FAFP71W56X116862 $4,500

APPENDIX
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
47 Police Equipment and Vehicles (continued)
Asset ID
Unit
No. Year Make Model Color Status Plate VIN Asset Value
8008110267 860 2003 Ford Ranger PU White Traffic/Other E1203497 1FTYR14VX3PB06858 $7,500 8008110277 861 2005 Chrysler Town & Country Van Black Crime Prev. /Pool Car
E1203767 2C4GP44R35R309307 $7,500
8008110292 862 2006 Ford Ranger PU White Traffic E1227521 1FTYR14U06PA18591 $8,200 8008110306 863 2008 Ford Ranger PU White Support Svs E1264691 1FTYR44U88PA05642 $8,900 8008110314
864 2008 Dodge Charger
Steel
Blue Lieutenant 6DHB188 2B3KA53H28H267170 $6,500
8008110347 872 2016 Universal DUI Trailer Black DUI 1488012 1U9EV212XGR078288 $27,000 00000022 890 2006 Ford Crown Victoria Patrol 1193310 2FAHP71W66X121335 $4,500 00000023 891 2007 Ford Crown Victoria Patrol 1081726 2FAHP71W47X111002 $4,750 8008110311 809 2008 Ford Crown Victoria Pool Car 1289886 2FAFP71V48X160149 $5,500 00000016 833 2018 Ford Fusion Lieutenant 8ABK089 3FA6P0G78JF207672 $15,000 00000017 835 2018 Ford Fusion Investigations 8CQT867 3FA6P0G7XJR207673 $15,000 00000018 834 2018 Ford Fusion InvestigationsSgt
8ASK722 3FA6P0G71JR207674 $15,000
00000019 836 2018 Ford Fusion Investigations 7ZVZ982 3FA6P0G73JR207675 $15,000 00000021 837 2018 Ford Fusion Operations
Sgt.

E1355431 3FA6P0G75JR207676 $15,000
00000020 832 2018 Ford Fusion Lieutenant 7ZWX428 3FA6P0G77JR207677 $15,000 00000005 2017 RU2 FAST 3450 1R9BR101XHJ482166 $16,000
00000057 2019 Ford Explorer Patrol 1340015 1FM5K8ARXKGA62376 $25,000 00000060 843 2019 Ford Escape SE 4WD C.O.U. 1340017 1FMCU9GD1KUB64783 $25,000 00000068 804 2020 Ford Explorer Special
Olympics
1355448 1FM5K8AB1LGC13240 $30,000
00000081 803 2021 Ford Explorer 1FM5K8ABXMGA42456 $35,000 Total Asset Value $516,100

APPENDIX
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
48 Depreciated Replacement Value of City Buildings
Public
Safety
Building
Fire
Station 74 City Hall
Post
Office
Memorial
Hall/Youth
Center
Appraised Value $11,950,518 $1,825,633 $7,786,125 $1,399,462 $3,893,975 Useful Life 50 50 50 50 50
years since appraisal 6 4 6 4 4
year of appraisal 2017 2019 2017 2019 2019
CCCI Year of
Appraisal1 6470 6854 6470 6854 6854
CCCI 20232 9508 9508 9508 9508 9508
Inflation 47% 39% 47% 39% 39%
Replacement Cost $17,561,905 $2,532,553 $11,442,114 $1,941,360 $5,401,797 Annual Depreciation $351,238 $50,651 $228,842 $38,827 $108,036 Accum. Depreciation $2,107,429 $202,604 $1,373,054 $155,309 $432,144 Current Value $15,454,476 $2,329,949 $10,069,060 $1,786,052 $4,969,653 Pinole
Senior
Center
Tiny Tots
Cay Care
Pinole
Swim
Center
PV
caretakers
building
PV Road
Restrooms and
Concessions
Appraised Value $5,283,367 $1,461,065 $1,460,491 $906,214 $298,151 Useful Life 50 50 50 50 50
years since appraisal 4 4 4 4 4
year of appraisal 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019
CCCI Year of Appraisal 6854 6854 6854 6854 6854
CCCI 2023 9508 9508 9508 9508 9508
inflation 39% 39% 39% 39% 39%
Replacement Cost $7,329,188 $2,026,817 $2,026,021 $1,257,117 $413,601 Annual Depreciation $146,584 $40,536 $40,520 $25,142 $8,272 Accum. Depreciation $586,335 $162,145 $162,082 $100,569 $33,088 Current Value $6,742,853 $1,864,672 $1,863,939 $1,156,548 $380,513 1Base Index: California Construction Cost Index 2016-2020, June 2019 or June 2017 as applicable 2Current index: June 2023
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/RESD/Resources/Page-Content/Real-Estate-Services-Division-Resources-ListFolder/DGS-California-Construction-Cost-Index-CCCI

APPENDIX
City of Pinole Development Impact Mitigation Fee Feasibility/Nexus Study January 2025
49 Existing Land Use Acreages by General Plan Designation Mixed Use - Low Density Residential/Downtown Commercial 2.14 Mixed Use - Medium Density Residential/Downtown Commercial 0 Mixed Use - Medium Density Residential/Neighborhood Commercial 8.98 Mixed Use - Medium Density Residential/Light Industrial Service Commercial 13.58 Mixed Use - High Density Residential/Downtown Commercial 6.97 Mixed Use - High Density Residential/Neighborhood Commercial 27.07 Mixed Use - High Density Residential/Light Industrial Service Commercial 1.2 Subtotal 59.94
Suburban/Rural Residential 252.03
Low Density Residential 1,091.88
Medium Density Residential 133.09
High Density Residential 17.76
Subtotal 1,494.76
Neighborhood Commercial 53.29
Downtown Commercial 5.58
Regional Commercial 156.5
Subtotal 215.37
Light Industrial/Service Commercial 17.24
Industrial/Office Park 14.84
Subtotal 32.08
Public Facilities 92.72
Major Institution/Medical 17.73
Parks and Recreation 285.69
Open Space 527.44
San Pablo Bay Conservation Area 248.4
Total 2,974.13
Source: City of Pinole General Plan Background Report, 2007

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
Prepared for the

CITY OF PINOLE
Prepared by
3100 Zinfandel Drive, Suite 125
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
(619) 218-9578
www.mbakerintl.com
January 2025

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
i
Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................1 Authority to Impose Capacity Charges ...............................................................................................1 Growth Projections .....................................................................................................................................1 Wastewater Demand From Existing and New Development............................................................2 Wastewater Equivalent Dwelling Units..................................................................................................3 Treatment and Disposal Improvements ...................................................................................................6 Wastewater Collection System Capital Improvements......................................................................6 Wastewater Facilities Costs Per Unit .........................................................................................................8 Wastewater Facilities for New Development.....................................................................................10 Schedule of Wastewater Capacity Charges........................................................................................10 Alternate Schedule for Nonresidential ...............................................................................................12 Compliance Requirements for Capacity Charges, Audit Provisions..................................................12 List of Tables
Table 1: Housing, Population and Employment Projections ..................................................................2 Table 2: Estimated Current and Projected Wastewater Flow.................................................................4 Table 3: Wastewater Flow Rate Assumptions...........................................................................................4 Table 4: Existing Housing Units and Nonresidential Floor Area WPCP Service Area ...........................5 Table 5: Estimated Current and Projected Flows to WPCP .....................................................................5 Table 6: Wastewater Capital Improvements ...........................................................................................7 Table 7: Fair-Share Cost of Wastewater System CIP Improvements .....................................................9 Table 8: Wastewater System Capital Assets Distribution ........................................................................9 Table 9: Wastewater Capacity Charges ................................................................................................11 Table 10: Alternate Water Meter Charges for Nonresidential..............................................................12

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents an analysis of the cost of wastewater facilities needed to accommodate new development in the City of Pinole. This report documents fully justified capacity charges that may be imposed on new or upgraded wastewater service connections that are typically associated with new land development in accordance with state law.

This report describes and analyzes the upgraded and expanded wastewater collection and treatment facilities necessary to provide capacity to serve the projected new wastewater service population to the year 2030.

AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE CAPACITY CHARGES
The City relies on its authority to impose the capacity charge under the police powers granted by the California Constitution pursuant to Government Code Section (GCS) 66013. Capacity charges are treated differently than impact fees that are authorized under GCS 66000-66009. The charges to be collected for capacity in the wastewater system are not subject to the findings and accounting requirements contained in GCS 66000–66009 but are subject to the provisions of Sections 66013 (limitations and establishment of fund accounts) 66016 (notice requirements), 66022 (legal challenge), and 66023 (audit provisions).

Pursuant to Government Code Section 66013, the City may impose a charge on new or upsized connections to the wastewater system for such connections’ proportional share of existing and/or future wastewater capacity needed for the new connections. These charges may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service, unless a popular vote is conducted, and two-thirds of the electors vote to charge more than the reasonable cost of the needed capacity.

This study provides the necessary documentation for the adoption of wastewater capacity charges.

GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Projections for population, employment, and housing growth to the year 2030 have been estimated for this study. The projections have three purposes: 1) to provide a basis for allocating the cost of capacity in the wastewater collection and treatment systems to customer groups—residential and nonresidential businesses; 2) to verify whether the existing and/or planned capacity of the system is adequate for the projected growth, using standard flow rates for the types of customers; and, 3) to determine the fair share of the value of existing capacity that should be allocated to new development, the cost of new capacity, and the capital improvements needed to ensure that the wastewater system is operating in accordance with waste discharge permits.

The current estimates of population and employment and the projections to the year 2030 used in this analysis are summarized in Table 1.

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
2 Table 1: Housing, Population and Employment Projections 2024 2030
Net
Growth2
Average
Annual Rate
Population1 18,192 19,312 1,120 1.00%
Employment3
Retail/Commercial 1,315 1,795 480
Office/Service 328 658 330
Industrial, including transportation,
construction, agriculture, manufacturing,
wholesale 519 512 227
Accommodations 32 36 4
Food Service 1,022 1,496 474
Health Care and Social Services 945 1,896 951
Public/Institutional/Educational Services 724 724 0
Other 6 6
Total Employment 4,891 7,123 2,466 7.0%
Housing4
Single-Family Units5 5,456 5,486 30
Multi-Family Units6 1,383 1,758 375
Mobile Homes/ADU 34 64 30
Total Occupied Units 6,873 7,308 435 1.0%
Overall Occupancy 2.65 2.64 2.57
1 Current population for City of Pinole is the California Department of Finance (DOF) Estimate, Table E-5 as of 1/1/2024
2 Population growth is based on a 1 percent average annual growth rate. It is noted that the population growth projections in Table 5 of the 2010 General Plan imply a 0.5 percent annual growth rate between 2020 and 2030, although the 2020 population estimated in Table 5 of the GP is substantially lower than the 2020 decennial census.
3 Current employment estimates from the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, US Census Bureau 2020. 2030 employment based on Three Corridors Specific Plan floor area growth and employment density factors.
4 Source of current housing estimates is DOF Table E-5 as of 1/1/2024, occupied units. 5 Estimate of occupied detached and attached single-family dwelling units. 6 Estimates of occupied units, including duplex, townhomes, and apartments.

Sources: CA-DOF Demographics Unit; City of Pinole

WASTEWATER DEMAND FROM EXISTING AND NEW DEVELOPMENT
The City of Pinole currently manages and maintains sewage collection mains, trunk lines, and pump stations that transport wastewater to either the Pinole/Hercules Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) at the foot of Tennent Avenue or the point of connection to the West County Wastewater District (WCWD) system for treatment by the WCWD. Based on population, approximately 33 percent of the volume treated by the WPCP is from Pinole (areas outside of the WCWD service area) and 67 percent from Hercules, a combined total population of approximately 44,000. The average dry weather flow (ADWF) of the WPCP for the years is between 3 and 3.5 million gallons per day (mgd).

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
3 WASTEWATER EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS
Total wastewater generated by all land uses in Pinole--flowing to the WPCP and to WCWD--is estimated to be approximately 1.125 mgd.1 This daily flow rate is used to calculate the allocation of total flow among all land uses and the equivalent dwelling units (EDU) in Table 2. To estimate the demand on wastewater facilities across all land use types, an EDU factor is calculated based on the demand of an equivalent singlefamily dwelling unit with an estimated daily flow of 163 gallons per day2 (1.0 EDU at 60 gallons per person per day and 2.70 persons per single family household). Average daily flow rates are given for each land use type in Table 3. Land development growth in the Pinole between 2024 and 2030 would increase the total Pinole flow by approximately 79,000 gallons to approximately 1.2 mgd ADWF. The total wastewater flow at buildout of the Pinole General Plan is estimated at approximately 1.47 mgd in the Sewer System Master Plan. After the recently completed improvements to the WPCP, in accordance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) order, the WCPC’s treatment capacity is rated at 4.06 mgd.3 Capacity in the WCPC is allocated 44%/56% to Pinole and Hercules, respectively.4 Pinole’s and Hercules’s share of the WCPC’s capacity is therefore approximately 1.8 and 2.3 mgd, respectively. Note that this study does not consider growth in Hercules. However, the Municipal Service Review for Hercules by the Contra Costa LAFCO projects a residential population of 28,700 for Hercules by 2040, which would require a minimum 1.72 mgd (assuming 60 gallons per day per capita) of ADWF capacity, not counting nonresidential growth.
1 Based on approximately 550,000 hundred cubic feet of total Test Year flow (2025) assumed in Pinole Sewer Rate Study May 2024, Willdan Associates.
2 Based on approximately 434,700 hundred cubic feet annual flow from single-family homes, Pinole Sewer Rate Study.
3 RWQCB Tentative Order R2-2018-00XX effective date April 1, 2018 4 Municipal Service Reviews for Pinole and Hercules Contra Costa LAFCO, 2008

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
4 Table 2: Estimated Current and Projected Wastewater Flow Land Use
Existing
Residential,
Units/Nonresidential,
1,000 square
feet
Growth
2024-2030
Residential,
Units/Nonresidential Total
EDU Factor
Residential,
per unit/
Nonresidential
unit
EDU
2024
EDU
Growth
EDU
2030
Estimated
Current
Gallons per
Day (average
dry weather
flow)
Gallons
per Day
Growth
(based
on EDU's)
Gallons per
Day 2030
Residential (in units)
Single-family 5,456 30 5,486 1.00 5,456 30 5,486 889,328 5,080 894,398 Multi-family 1,383 375 1,758 0.58 802 218 1,020 130,726 36,842 167,568 Mobile homes/ADU 34 30 64 0.66 22 20 42 42 3586 6,966
Subtotal 6,873 435 7,308 6,280 268 6,548 6,548 45,292 1,068,932 Nonresidential (in thousand square feet, except where noted) Office 910 132 1,042 0.14 127 18 145 20,701 3,042 23,743 Retail/Commercial 1,010 336 1,346 0.070 71 24 95 11,573 4,056 15,629 Food Service 112 95 207 1.18 132 112 244 21,516 18,928 40,444 Industrial 476 113 590 0.37 176 42 218 28,688 7,098 35,786 Motel Rooms 150 12 162 0.24 36 3 39 5,868 507 6,375
Institutional 1,086 0 1,086 0.08 87 0 87 14,181 0 14,181 Subtotal 3,744 688 4,432 629 199 828 102,527 33,631 136,158 Total 6,909 467 7,376 1,126,167 78,923 1,205,090
Growth Percentage 6.55%
Table 3: Wastewater Flow Rate Assumptions
Residential Flow Rate Current Flow Rate Growth
Single-family (1 EDU)*
163 gpd/du 169 gpd/du
Multi-family 95 gpd/du 98 gpd/du
Mobile Home/ADU 84 gpd/du 84 gpd/du
*
Calibrated flow rates based on Sewer Rate Study flow rates for residential
Nonresidential: Applied Flow rate1 Flow/unit
Office 24 gpd/1,000 sf 9.5 gpd/emp
Commercial/Retail 11.4 gpd/1,000 sf 8.0 gpd/emp
Food Service 200.0 gpd/1,000 sf 40.0 gpd/emp
Industrial/Warehouse 63 gpd/1,000 sf 12.5 gpd/emp
Hotel/Room 40.0 gpd/room 133 gpd/emp
Institution 13.4 gpd/1,000 sf 20.0 gpd/emp
1Sewage Flow Rate Estimating Guide, Pollution Control Systems

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
5 Growth in WPCP Service Area
Approximately 0.4 square miles in the northwest part of Pinole lie within the WCWD service area, which handles the wastewater flow from approximately 565 dwelling units and 1.8 million square feet of nonresidential floor area located in Pinole. The area within the WCWD is included in the projections for the collection system, but this area does not figure into the costs and demand for WPCP treatment capacity. The assumptions used to project the number of new dwelling units in all of Pinole between 2024 and 2030 were stated in the Growth Projections section and Table 1 above.

The estimated existing development and assumptions for projected development within Pinole’s WPCP service area are given in Table 4. In this study it is assumed that all new development in Pinole will occur within the WPCD service area. This information is provided to properly allocate WPCP costs to the appropriate service area. It is roughly estimated that 90 percent of Pinole’s total population is connected to the WPCP.5
Table 4: Housing Units and Nonresidential Floor Area WPCP Service Area
Total 2024 Units
for WPCP only Growth
Total
2030
Single-Family Units 5,009 30 5,039
Multi-Family Units 1,270 375 1,645
Mobile Homes/ADU 29 30 59
Nonresidential Land Use (1,000’s of square feet)
Office 836 132 968
Commercial/Retail 212 336 548
Food Service 69 95 164
Industrial 399 113 512
Hotel (rooms) 22 12 34
Public/Institutional 1,086 0 1,086
The estimates of current and projected future wastewater EDUs that flow to the WPCP are shown in Table

5. 5 As indicated in Table 2.5 of the Sewer System Master Plan (Carollo, 2022) the population connected to the WPCP is approximately 90 percent of the total population of Pinole.

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
5 Table 5: Estimated Current and Projected Flows to WPCP Land Use
Existing
Residential,
Units/Nonresidential, 1,000
square feet
Growth
2024-2030
Residential,
Units/Nonresidential Total
EDU Factor
Residential,
per unit/
Nonresidential
unit
EDU
2024
EDU
Growth
EDU
2030
Estimated
Current
Gallons
per Day
(average
dry
weather
flow)
Gallons per
Day Growth
(based on
EDU's)
Gallons
per Day
2030
Residential (in units)
Single-family 5,009 30 5,039 1.00 5,009 30 5,039 816,467 5,070 851,591 Multi-family 1,270 375 1,645 0.58 737 218 955 120,131 36,842 161,395 Mobile homes/ADU 29 30 59 0.66 19 15 39 3,097 3,380 6,591 Subtotal 6,308 435 6,743 5,765 268 6,033 939,695 45,292 1,019,577 Nonresidential (in thousand square feet, except where noted) Office 836 132 968 0.14 117 18 135 19,071 3,042 22,815
Retail/Commercial 212 336 548 0.070 15 24 39 2,445 4,056 6,591 Food Service 69 95 164 1.18 81 112 193 13,203 18,928 32,617 Industrial 399 113 512 0.37 148 42 190 24,124 7,098 32,110 Motel Rooms 22 12 34 0.24 5 3 8 815 507 1,352
Institutional 1,086 0 1,086 0.08 87 0 87 14,181 0 14,703 Subtotal 688 3,312 453 199 652 73,839 33,631 110,188
Total 6,218 467 6,685 1,013,534 78,923 1,129,765
Growth percentage 6.99%

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
6 TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL IMPROVEMENTS
In 2007, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issued waste discharge requirements for the WPCP, which were subsequently updated in 2012 and again in 2018, requiring improvements to be made to the WPCP to provide secondary treatment up to 20 mgd and that up to 14.6 mgd of treated effluent be discharged to the Rodeo deep water outfall. The RWQCB order also required that the WPCP shallow water outfall shall be limited to flows that exceed 14.6 mgd. The WPCP’s current design ADWF capacity of 4.06 mgd was achieved with the recent completion of the required improvements. The City obtained a State Revolving Fund loan, estimated at approximately $26.7 million, to fund its share of the improvements.

WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
The City’s FY 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Program outlines a five-year program of wastewater system upgrades, and rehabilitation that will benefit both existing and future development. Table 6 lists the City’s planned wastewater system improvements projects, the schedule, and estimated costs for completion.

Approximately $15.2 million in capital improvement costs are required to upgrade facilities that benefit current and future development in Pinole. While the Sewer Enterprise Fund is expected to cover much of this cost, new development may be charged a proportional share of the cost based on the percentage of 2030 flow volume that is contributed by new development.

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
7 Table 6: Wastewater Capital Improvements
2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 Total
SEWER SYSTEM CIP Projects
Increase effluent outfall (Rodeo Outfall) and
pumping capacity at treatment plant1
$150,000 $3,000,000 $3,150,000
Sewer Collection System Rehabilitation $1,500,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $4,700,000 Secondary clarifier center column
rehabilitation1 $425,000 $425,000
Air valve release replacements $50,000 $50,000
Sewer Pump Station Rehabilitation $1,200,000 $2,254,000 $3,329,000 $1,200,000 $6,783,000 WPCP lab remodel $100,000 $100,000
Total Wastewater System: $15,208,000
1 50 percent of total cost is shared by Hercules.

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
8 WASTEWATER FACILITIES COSTS PER UNIT
This section discusses the calculation of wastewater facilities cost per EDU, which is the standard used to determine the fair-share cost of wastewater facilities for new residential and nonresidential development.

To ensure equity between existing and new development in terms of the allocation of capital costs associated with serving those groups, a cost per EDU is determined for all capital improvements to the wastewater collection and treatment systems. These improvements are needed to serve both existing and anticipated new development.

In determining the cost per EDU, the wastewater system capital improvement costs from Table 6 are allocated to new development in Table 7. In addition to the capital improvements, this study also considers the current value of the City’s wastewater system, both treatment and collection facilities. This component of the wastewater capacity charge represents the City’s capital investment in the wastewater system and the value of the capacity currently available to serve new development. The capital asset values shown in Table 8 are the depreciated values from the City’s 2023 Consolidated Financial Report— Capital Assets-at Year End--Business-Type Activities, including buildings, sewer lines, vehicles, and equipment. The recent investment in the WPCP upgrades is reflected in these asset values.

The costs per EDU are also based on the percentage that new development’s volume of flow contributes to the total volume in 2030. The improvements and capital assets are assigned either the 5.93 percent factor from Table 2--city wide EDUs for the collection system, or 6.55 percent from Table 5—WPCP EDUs for the WPCP-related treatment system cost and values. Since all new development is expected to be within the WPCP service area, the percentage from Table 5 accurately captures the true fair share costs to new development for the treatment system. The fair-share cost of the improvements charged to new development is $1.0 million, while the value of current assets to be charged to new development is approximately $3.4 million.

The cost per EDU is derived from two factors: the typical daily flow rate in gallons per day and the sewage strength factors, including total suspended solids (TSS), oxygen demand (OD), and fats, oils, and grease (FOG). This study uses the sewage strength factors from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.

The cost to collect, treat, and dispose of sewage is related to both the volume of flow and the sewer strength factors. Each component of the wastewater system is affected by these factors to varying degrees. For example, 95 percent of the cost of collecting sewage is due to the volume of sewage and 5 percent to amount of FOG in the system. Wastewater mains and pump stations must be sized to handle the expected peak flows, while FOG contribute to the need to have specialized equipment to remove these materials, which clog the wastewater mains and cause backup and overflows. The cost factors for the wastewater strength characteristics are shown in Tables 7 and 8.

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
9 Table 7: Fair-Share Cost of Wastewater System CIP Improvements Wastewater System CIP
Improvements Costs
Percentage
Allocated
to Growth
Cost
Allocation
to Growth Sewer Strength Cost Factors1
Increase effluent outfall capacity $3,150,000 6.99% $220,185 50% 22.5% 22.5% 5% Collection System Rehabilitation $4,700,000 6.55% $307,850 95% 0% 0% 5% Secondary column rehabilitation $425,000 6.99% $29,708 50% 22.5% 22.5% 5% Air valve release replacements $50,000 6.99% $3,495 50% 22.5% 22.5% 5% Pump Station Rehabilitation $6,783,000 6.55% $444,287 95% 0% 0% 5% WPCP lab remodel $100,000 6.99% $6,990 34% 33% 33% 0%
$15,208,000 $1,012,514
Cost of improvements attributable to constituents $843,600 $59,319 $59,319 $50,276 2024-2030 Cost per EDU Growth 420 $1,806.42 $127.02 $127.02 $107.66 1 Cost factors recommended by Black & Veatch consultants in San Francisco PUC Clean Water Enterprise Wastewater Rate Study, 2003 Table 8: Wastewater System Capital Assets Distribution
Capital Assets Value
Percentage
Allocated
to Growth
Cost
Allocation to
Growth Sewer Strength Cost Factors1
Depreciated Costs (2020) Flow BOD TSS FOG
Buildings and Improvements $40,059,940 6.99% $2,800,190 34% 33% 33% 0% Treatment Equipment $1,205,935 6.99% $84,295 50% 22.5% 22.5% 5% Collection System $7,328,511 6.55% $480,017 95% 0% 0% 5% Vehicles $902,406 6.55% $59,108 95% 0% 0% 5%
Total Current Asset Value $49,496,791 $3,423,610
Value of assets attributable to constituents $1,506,381 $943,029 $943,029 $31,171 2024-2030 New EDUs 420
Fair-Share capital asset value per EDU
per constituents $3,225.65 $2,019.33 $2,019.33 $66.75
Total Parameter Cost per EDU $5,032.08 $2,146.36 $2,146.36 $174.41 Overall Total Cost per EDU $9,499.19

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
10 WASTEWATER FACILITIES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
The wastewater capacity charge includes the proportionate share of the improvements to the wastewater system necessary to serve new development. The cost of the CIP improvements listed in Table 6 and the asset values in Table 8 are allocated to new development using the percentage EDU growth between 2024 and 2030 calculated in Tables 2 and 5, wastewater flows citywide and flows to WPCP only, respectively.

The improvements will benefit both existing and new development; using the percentage growth to calculate the capacity charge ensures that new development pays for only the improvements needed to accommodate the additional demands placed on the system by the new development.

SCHEDULE OF WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGES
In Table 9 the total cost for each unit of land development is calculated by multiplying the EDU factors in Table 2 by the total cost per EDU for each wastewater characteristic in. The wastewater capacity charge per unit of new development is based on the capital asset values and the new development’s share of the cost per EDU of improvements to the treatment and collection systems. The charge represents the amount required to fully fund all facilities needed to accommodate growth.

The charges in Table 9 may be imposed on permits to make new or upsized connections to the wastewater system. Reconstruction, replacement, or expansion of existing development on a parcel of land that will result in a larger floor area or more intensive use of the parcel may be charged based on a prorated charge *per square foot with a credit given for the floor area and use of the existing development.

WASTEWATER CAPACITY CHARGE
City of Pinole Wastewater Capacity Charge
January 2025 Final Draft Report
11 Table 9: Wastewater Capacity Charges
Costs per EDU
Current
Fees
Land Use1 EDU Flow OD TSS FOG Total
Current
Fee
Increase
(Decrease)
Residential, per unit
Single Family 1.00 $5,032.08 $2,146.36 $2,146.36 $174.41 $9,499.19 $5,684.45 68% Multi-family 0.58 $2,918.61 $1,244.89 $1,244.89 $101.15 $5,509.53 $4,263.05 30% ADU 0.66 $3,321.17 $1,416.59 $1,416.59 $115.11 $6,269.47 N/A Nonresidential, per 1,000 sq. ft., except where noted
Office 0.14 $704.49 $300.49 $300.49 $24.42 $1,329.89 $2,640.40 (49%) Retail/Commercial 0.07 $352.25 $150.24 $150.24 $12.21 $664.94 $2,640.40 (75%) Food Service 1.18 $5,937.85 $2,532.70 $2,532.70 $205.80 $11,209.05 N/A N/A Industrial 0.37 $1,861.87 $794.15 $794.15 $64.53 $3,514.70 $2,160.85 64% Hotel, per room 0.24 $1,207.70 $515.13 $515.13 $41.86 $2,279.81 N/A N/A Institutional 0.08 $402.57 $171.71 $171.71 $13.95 $759.94 $1,439.80 (47%)