HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.b. Approving Negative Declaration, proposed annexation and initiating annexition proceedings for CCCSD Annexation 183 (DA 183)PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE
.6.b
DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183- ORINDA, PLEASANT HILL AND WALNUT CREEK
SUGGESTED AGENDA
June 21, 2012
Request staff report
Il. Public hearing on the Negative Declaration
A. Open public hearing.
B. Receive public comment.
C. Close public hearing.
III. Consider approval of the Negative Declaration and District Annexation
183 - Orinda, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek (DA 183).
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Pape rs \Leavitt\2012 \6 -21 -12 \Conduct PH Neg Declaration for DA 183 6 -21 -12 FINAL.doc
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
' BOARD OF DIRECTORS
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: June 21, 2012
subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183- ORINDA,
PLEASANT HILL, AND WALNUT CREEK (DA 183)
Submitted By: Initiating Dept. /Div.:
Russell B. Leavitt, Engineering Assistant III Engineering /Environmental Services
REV WED AND RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD ACTION: /
2-
R. Leavitt T. Brightbill J. Mi moto -Mills
,r/, f"fl-
Kent Alm
W��
Ann E. Farrell
General Manager
ISSUE: Board approval of appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
documentation is required prior to approval of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
(CCCSD) Annexation 183 - Orinda, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek (DA 183) and a
Board of Directors' Resolution of Application is required to initiate formal Contra Costa
Local Agency Formation Commission ( LAFCO) annexation proceedings.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the Negative Declaration; and,
2) Barring any irresolvable comments to the contrary, adopt the attached resolution
approving the Negative Declaration, the proposed annexation and application to
initiate LAFCO annexation proceedings.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The District incurs costs to prepare annexation applications
and pays fees to LAFCO, the County Surveyor and the State Board of Equalization for
annexation processing. Annexation costs are recovered as "annexation charges" when
property is connected to the public sewer system.
ALTERNATIVES/CONSIDERATIONS: The Board may elect to withhold or defer
approval of the Negative Declaration, which would prevent or delay moving forward with
the annexation. If the Board does not approve the Negative Declaration, it may direct
staff to conduct additional analysis and provide further documentation for particular
areas of concern. The Board could decline to initiate annexation of these areas, which
would require that the property owners apply directly to LAFCO for annexation to the
District.
BACKGROUND: The District proposes to annex ten (10) Orinda parcels, twelve (12)
Pleasant Hill parcels, and one (1) Walnut Creek parcel comprising 91.0 acres. Four (4)
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Leavitt\2012 \6 -21 -12 \Conduct PH Neg Declaration for DA 183 6 -21 -12 FINAL.doc Page 1 of 4
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: June 21, 2012
subject CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183- ORINDA,
PLEASANT HILL, AND WALNUT CREEK (DA 183)
properties in Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek are already connected to the District's
public sewer system. These properties and an additional nineteen (19) unannexed
parcels were organized into seven (7) "annexation areas" to eliminate "islands" within
District boundaries. All of the annexation areas are within the District's Sphere of
Influence and the County Urban Limit Line. The general location of each annexation
area is shown on Attachment 1.
Annexation will allow for the following associated indirect and secondary activities:
1) Sanitary sewer extensions into residential neighborhoods;
2) Abandonment of septic systems; and
3) The connection of existing and future residences to the public sewer system.
Unlike many other District annexations, this one was not exempt from CEQA, because
it included one or more properties that could be developed with more than three
residential units. Several such properties (and nearby exempt properties) from different
cities were purposefully grouped together to consolidate the environmental review. As
Lead Agency under CEQA, therefore, the District conducted an Initial Study of the
proposed project (DA 183) to determine if it would have a significant effect on the
environment. Staff has concluded that the Initial Study adequately, accurately, and
objectively evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed project and that a
Negative Declaration is the appropriate document to address the environmental effects
of the project. A draft Negative Declaration was prepared, which includes the Initial
Study. The draft Negative Declaration was distributed separately to the Board of
Directors on May 11, 2012.
Approval of the draft Negative Declaration would establish the Board's independent
finding that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project would have
significant effects on the environment. The proposed annexation action is a
jurisdictional and tax boundary change that will have no direct physical effects on the
environment. Mitigation measures related to the associated secondary and indirect
projects will be incorporated into the designs of those projects to reduce potentially
significant impacts to less- than - significant levels or to minimize impacts already
considered to be less- than - significant. These measures are discussed in the Initial
Study and are inherent in the permit and land use approval processes of the various
agencies that regulate sanitary sewer construction and land development activities in
the project area.
In compliance with the District's CEQA Guidelines, a legal notice was published in the
Contra Costa Times and the San Ramon Valley Times, newspapers of general
circulation in the area affected by the proposed project. The legal notice announced
the District's intent to adopt a Negative Declaration and the availability of the document
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Leavitt\2012 \6 -21 -12 \Conduct PH Neg Declaration for DA 183 6 -21 -12 FINAL.doc Page 2 of 4
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: June 21, 2012
subiecr. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183- ORINDA,
PLEASANT HILL, AND WALNUT CREEK (DA 183)
for a 30 -day public review period. Additionally, copies of the proposed Negative
Declaration or the legal notice were mailed to affected public agencies. At the
conclusion of the public review process, three comment letters on the proposed
Negative Declaration were received. The comment letters and CCCSD's responses to
the comments are presented in Attachment 2. None of these comments require
changes to the conclusions reached in the draft Negative Declaration.
Before the proposed project may be approved, the Board must consider any comments
received during the Negative Declaration's 30 -day public review process and the public
hearing and then consider approval of the appropriate CEQA documentation (a
Negative Declaration is recommended in this case).
Following approval of the Negative Declaration and the project, a Notice of
Determination will be filed with the County Clerk and an annexation application will be
filed with the LAFCO. LAFCO will use the approved Negative Declaration as its CEQA
documentation for consideration of the proposed annexation.
While not required by law or the District's procedures, it has been customary to hold
public hearings in advance of the adoption of Negative Declarations. Holding a hearing
on the proposed Negative Declaration would be consistent with this practice.
Staff has drafted a Resolution of Application requesting that LAFCO initiate annexation
proceedings for the seven (7) areas. These areas are described below:
• Annexation Area 183 -1 is comprised of three (3) existing single family homes on
Echo Court and Stonehedge Drive in Pleasant Hill. These properties are
connected to the District's public sewer system.
• Annexation Area 183 -2 is comprised of six (6) vacant parcels and part of the
Contra Costa Canal located on Little Road and Camino Las Juntas in Pleasant
Hill.
• Annexation Area 183 -3 is comprised of one (1) vacant parcel located on Roche
Drive in Pleasant Hill.
• Annexation Area 183 -4 is comprised of one (1) CCWD water tank site near
Hamilton Drive in Pleasant Hill.
• Annexation Area 183 -5 is comprised of one (1) single family home on Snyder
Lane in Walnut Creek. This property is connected to the District's public sewer
system.
• Annexation Area 183 -6 is comprised of three (3) vacant parcels, two (2) single
family homes, one (1) communications tower site, and one (1) commercial stable
on Lomas Cantadas, Tres Mesas, and Los Venados in Orinda.
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Pape rs \Leavitt\2012 \6 -21 -12 \Conduct PH Neg Declaration for DA 183 6 -21 -12 FINAL.doc Page 3 of 4
POSITION PAPER
Board Meeting Date: June 21, 2012
subject CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER APPROVING A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183- ORINDA,
PLEASANT HILL, AND WALNUT CREEK (DA 183)
• Annexation Area 183 -7 is comprised of one (1) EBMUD water tank site, one (1)
ranch parcel, and one (1) communications tower site on Crest View Drive in
Orinda.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION:
1) Conduct a public hearing on the draft Negative Declaration.
2) Adopt a resolution (Attachment 3) approving the Negative Declaration, the
proposed annexation, and the application to LAFCO initiating annexation
proceedings for District Annexation 183 - Orinda, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek
(DA 183).
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Papers \Leavitt\2012 \6 -21 -12 \Conduct PH Neg Declaration for DA 183 6 -21 -12 FINAL.doc Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT 1
Source: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Figure 1 -1 District Annexation 183 Areas 1 -7 — Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Orinda
N: \ENVRSEC \Position Pape rs\Leavitt\201 2\6-21 -1 2\Cond uct PH Neg Declaration for DA 183 6 -21 -12 FINAL.doc
ATTACHMENT 2
COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR CCCSD'S DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183
— ORINDA, PLEASANT HILL AND WALNUT CREEK (DA 183)
Four comment letters were received during the 30 -day public review period for the
Negative Declaration. The comment letters follow, along with the responses from
CCCSD staff. The responses are keyed to each alpha numerically coded comment.
None of these comments required changes to the conclusions of the proposed
Negative Declaration.
LIST OF COMMENT LETTERS
State Water Resources Control Board, Susan Stewart, Environmental Scientist,
Division of Financial Assistance, May 18, 2012.
2. City of Pleasant Hill, Troy Fujimoto, Senior Planner, May 18, 2012.
3. East Bay Municipal Utility District, William R. Kirkpatrick, Manager of Water
Distribution Planning, May 29, 2012.
4. State Clearinghouse, Scott Morgan, Director, June 8, 2012.
1. State Water Resources Control Board, Susan Stewart, Environmental Scientist,
Division of Financial Assistance, May 18, 2012
O�
a ♦[rre�.I•
Water Boards
St to Water Resources Control Board
vI OM2
Mr. Russell Leavitt
Environmental Coordinator
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Mr. Leavitt:
E - tea 6-- J,
K•R M Rp��ou[x
4muCW[wiK rwOrccr OM
RECEIVEC
?,,,.4Y 2 1 2012
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND ( CWSRF) PROGRAM
INFORMATION FOR THE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
[DISTRICT]; CCCSD DISTRICT ANNEXATION PLEASANT
WILL AND WALNUT CREEK [PROJECT]; SATE CLEARINGOUS NO.
2012052024
We have received a copy of the District's draft Negative Declaration from the
State Clearinghouse for the Project. Since the Project may be eligible for
CWSRF financing, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water
Board) is providing information on the environmental review requirements of the
CWSRF Program should you decide to pursue CWSRF financing in the future.
The CWSRF Program provides low -cost financial assistance for a wide variety of
water quality improvement and enhancement projects that protect water quality
and public health. It has grant funds under certain conditions with limited
availability. The application period is continuous. For additional information,
please refer to the State Water Board's CWSRF Program website at
http: //www waterboards ca gov /water issues /programs /grants loans /srf/index.sht
MI.
Due to staffing constraints, we are unable to provide "specific" comments at this
time if there are no clear indications that an agency will seek funding from the
CWSRF Program. If you decide to pursue CWSRF financing, please note that in
addition to CEQA requirements, there are federal environmental laws and
regulations applicable to the CWSRF Program. Any environmental issues must
be resolved before the State Water Board can approve CWSRF financing for
your Project. Four enclosures are included that further explain the CWSRF
Program environmental review process and the additional federal requirements.
The District must meet those listed federal requirements if it decides to seek
CWSRF financing.
CHARLES R. HOPPIN, CHAIRMAN , THOMAS HOWARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
1001 1 Stree: Sacra. 1ent0. CA 95814 I Mad g AOCreSS- P.O. Box 100, Sa—r enl0, CA 9581 2 -01 00 W ,Wa'err, a GS.Ca gOV
40 ........ —E.
lA
Mr. Russell Leavitt -2-
Thank you for your consideration of the CWSRF Program. State Water Board
staff is more than happy to discuss your Project in more detail if you are planning
to apply for CWSRF financing. if you have any questions or concerns about the
State Water Board CWSRF Program environmental review process or the
information provided in this letter, please feel free to contact me at
(916) 341 -6983 or SStewart@waterboards.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
Susan Stewart, Environmental Scientist
Division of Financial Assistance
Enclosures (4)
1. SRF & CEQA -Plus
2. Quick Reference Guide to CEQA Requirements for State Revolving Fund
Loans
3. Instructions and Guidance for "Environmental Compliance Information"
4. Basic Criteria for Cultural Resources Reports
cc: Include ERU Lead and PM (if applicable)
RESPONSE TO STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD COMMENTS
1 A. CCCSD does not intend to pursue CWSRF financing for this annexation in the
future.
2. Citv of Pleasant Hill, Trov Fuiimoto, Senior Planner, Mav 18. 2012
lomcycw Pow
RECEIVED
4ibclty of Pleasant Hill k1AY 21 2012
May 18, 2012
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Mr. Russell Leavitt, Environmental Coordinator
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, CA 94553
RE: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Annexation 183 — Orinda, Pleasant Hill and Walnut
Creek, Negative Declaration
Dear Mr. Leavitt,
Thank you for the opportunity for the City of Pleasant Hill to comment on the above draft
environmental document. The City has reviewed the document and is providing comment on the
identified potential development of Annexation Area 2 within the City of Pleasant Hill. We are not
certain if the potential development of 26 dwelling units identified in the document is accurate
without knowing the average slope of the site. For your information, in Pleasant Hill, the
development intensity for hillside properties is governed by the City's Hillside Planned Unit
Development ordinance (attached). Please ensure that your analysis is based on conformity with
this ordinance to more accurately determine the potential number of allowable dwelling units for 2 �i
this proposed annexation area.
Please keep the City of Pleasant Hill informed of progress on the project including final action on
the proposed project. If you have any questions please give me a call or email at 925 -671 -5224,
tfuiimoto (o,ci.pleasant- hill.ca.us.
A TS' rely,
to� Fujimoto
Senior Planner
Attachment
CC: File
100 Gregory Lane - Pleasant HIII - California 94523 -3323 - (925) 671 -5270 - FAX (925) 256 -8190
RESPONSES TO CITY OF PLEASANT HILL COMMENTS
2A. CCCSD staff verified with City of Pleasant Hill Planning staff in advance the
development assumptions used in the Initial Study for properties within Pleasant
Hill.
Pleasant Hill Municipal Code 1835.030
Chapter 18.35
HILLSIDE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (HPUD)
Sections:
1835.010 Specific purposes.
18.35.020 Applicability.
18.35.030 Land use regulations for HPUD district.
18.35.040 Development regulation for HPUD district.
18.35.050 Design standards.
18.35.060 Concept plan.
18.35.070 Planning commission, architectural review commission and city council action.
18.35.080 Zoning map designation.
18.35.090 Development plan review.
1835.010 Specific purposes.
In addition to the general purposes listed in PHMC § 18.05.020, the specific purposes of the Hillside Planned
Unit Development district are to:
A. Preserve the physical and visual identity of the hills and gdgelines of Pleasant Hill and the natural geologic
conditions consistent with the city-wide design guidelines while allowing controlled development.
B. Utilize performance standards and specific regulations to ensure that utilization of land for urban purposes
is kept in balance with the need to conserve natural resources and protect life and property from natural haz-
ards.
C. Ensure orderly and thorough planning and review procedures that will result in quality urban design. (Ord.
856 § 2 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 710 § 35 -10.1, 1996; 1991 code § 35 -10.1)
1835.020 Applicability.
The HPUD district shall be imposed upon any parcel site that has a general plan residential land use designa-
tion with an average slope of 15% or greater. Residential parcels, with an average slope of 15% or greater,
which are subdivided to their maximum density and in a zoning district other than HPUD shall be subject only
to PHMC § 18.35.040.13, D and E and PHMC § 18.35.050. (Ord 710 § 35-10.2,1996; 1991 code § 35 -10.2)
1835.030 Land use regulations for HPUD district.
Schedule 18.35.030 sets forth the land use regulations for the HPUD district as established by letter designa-
tions as follows:
"P" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts.
"U" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit.
"T"' designates use classifications permitted on approval of a temporary use permit.
"L" followed by a number designates use classifications subject to certain limitations listed by number follow-
ing the schedule.
"P/U" designates use classifications permitted on the site of a permitted use, but requiring a use permit on the
site of a conditional use.
18 -55 (Revised 10/11)
18.35.030
The uses listed are based on the use classifications set forth in PHMC Chapter 18.15. Use classifications not
listed are prohibited unless authorized by zoning administrator resolution under PHMC § 18.15.010. The
"Additional Use Regulations" column includes specific limitations applicable to the use classifications or
refers to regulations located elsewhere in this chapter.
SCHEDULE 18.35.030
P Permitted
U Use Permit Required
HPUD DISTRICTS:
T Temporary Use Permit Required
LAND USE REGULATIONS
L Limited (see specific limitations listed following schedule)
U
HPUD Additional Use Regulations
Residential Uses
Religious assembly
Congregate care, limited
U
Day care, limited
P
Home occupation
U See PHMC § 18.20.070.
Residential care, limited
P
Secondary dwelling unit
P See PHMC § 18.20.100.
Single - family residential
P
with boarder or lodger
P No more than 3 boarders or lodgers in rooms with no
P
kitchen facilities.
Public and Semipublic
Day care, large family
U See PHMC § 18.20.080.
Day care, general
U
Park and recreational facilities
U
Public safety facilities
U
Religious assembly
U
Residential care, general
U
Schools, public or private
U
Utilities, major
U
Utilities, minor
P
Commercial Uses
Animal sales and service
L -1 Only animal boarding and riding academies.
Horticulture, limited
P
Accessory Uses
PIU L -2
Temporary Uses
Agricultural sales T
Commercial filming, limited T
Personal property sales P See PHMC § 18.15.070 and Chapter 18.100.
Street fairs T
Nonconforming Uses See PHMC Chapter 18.65.
(Revised 10111) 18 -56
Pleasant Hill Municipal Code 18.35.040
HPUD District: Additional Use Regulations
L -1 The keeping of large animals on a site of at least one acre is permitted with no more than two large animals per
acre. Any barn, stable or other structure used to house large animals shall be located at least 100 feet from the
boundary line of a street or public road and at least 50 feet from a side, front or rear property line.
L -2 Domestic and small animals are permitted, except no more than three mature dogs and no more than five
mature cats or rabbits and five hens may be kept, harbored, possessed or maintained on any parcel. Farm
animals including roosters, geese, turkeys, pigs, goats and sheep are not permitted.
(Ord. 856 § 2 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 710 § 35-10.4,1996; 1991 code § 35 -10.4)
1835.040 Development regulation for HPUD district.
A. Residential unit density. The number of residential units allowed on a site in the HPUD district shall be
computed based on the average percent of slope of the natural terrain of the site and the allowable density per
net acre associated with that average percentage, as shown in Schedule 18.35.040. Any existing legal parcel
within the HPUD district, with a slope equal to or greater than 15% and containing less than 15,000 square feet
of gross lot area, may be developed with one single - family dwelling unit (and, if approved, a secondary dwell-
ing unit) subject to compliance with all other applicable development standards and design guidelines. Frac-
tional average percent of slope shall be rounded upward to the next whole number, but the maximum number
of units allowed on a site in the HPUD district shall not be rounded upward to the nearest whole number.
Schedule 18.35.040 also shows in column (2) the average lot area that must be achieved for each slope per-
centage based upon the maximum allowable density.
B. Performance standards.
1. Grain e. On parcels with 15% to 29.9% slopes, the grading is limited to no more than 30% of the gross
site area. On slopes in excess of 29.9 %, the grading is limited to no more than 15% of the gross site area.
2. Impervious surface coverage. Impervious surfaces are those which do not absorb water, including all
buildings, parking areas, driveways, roads, sidewalks, and any areas of concrete or asphalt. On parcels with
15% to 29.9% slopes, the impervious surface coverage is limited to 15% of the gross site area. On slopes
in excess of 30 9/a, the impervious surface coverage is limited to 8% of the gross site.
3. Noncompliance. If the grading or impervious surface coverage standards are not met, allowable density
shall be reduced until both standards are met.
C. Reduced density for environmental impact mitigation. The planning commission shall reduce the allowable
number of residential dwelling units allowed on a site upon finding that such reduced density is required to
preserve the physical and visual identity of the hills and ridgelines, protect natural vegetation including trees,
retain scenic corridors, or provide for adequate drainage or appropriate internal circulation, and upon making
the required findings under Government Code section 65589.5.
D. Maximum number of stories and maximum building height. No dwelling or structure shall exceed a height
of 35 feet.
E. Other development regulations. The requirements and standards for yards or setbacks applicable to a hill-
side planned unit development are those standards set forth for the R district(s) similar in nature and function
to the proposed planned unit development unless modified by the design standards in PHMC § 18.35.050. The
requirements and standards for public improvements are those which apply in other R district(s) in the city,
unless modified by the planning commission because of special topographical and design considerations.
18 -57 (Revised hurl)
18.35.050
SCHEDULE 1835.040
HPUD DISTRICT. SLOPEMENSITY REGULATIONS
Average Percent Slope
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43 or more
(1)
Allowable Density
(Dwelling Units per Net Acre)
2.904
2.848
2.734
2.614
2.489
2360
2.227
2.000
1.954
1.815
1.678
1.541
1.406
1275
1.147
1.025
0.908
0.798
0.696
0.601
0.515
0.438
0372
0315
0.270
0.236
0213
0201
0.200
(2)
Average Lot Area Required
(Sq. Ft.)
15,000
15,294
15,932
16,664
17,501
18,457
19,559
21,780
22,292
24,000
25,959
28,267
30,981
34,164
37,977
42,497
47,973
55,209
62,586
72,479
84,582
99,225
117,096
138,285
161,081
184,576
204,507
216,716
217,800
(Ord. 856 § 2 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 710 § 35 -10.6, 1996; 1991 code § 35 -10.6)
1835.050 Design standards.
A. Grading. Streets, buildings, and other manmade structures shall be designed to complement the natural ter-
rain and landscape.
(Revised 10111) 18 -58
Pleasant Hill Municipal Code 18.35.060
B. Ridge views. The location of structures shall not disrupt the natural silhouette of prominent ridges as
viewed from a public street.
C. Landscaping. Landscaping of areas around structures shall provide a smooth transition and blend into the
natural landscape. Native and other drought- tolerant plants shall be used except immediately adjacent to resi-
dential structures. Graded areas shall be replanted to protect them from soil erosion and to eliminate visual
scarring.
D. Building design. To reduce visual impacts and the amount of grading, both upslope and downslope units
are encouraged.
E. Street design. The pattern of roadways in the hillsides shall be based upon good engineering practice and
upon the general policy of maintaining the natural environmental setting of the hillside. In response to this pol-
icy, public rights -of -way shall be aligned in a manner to avoid existing trees and riparian environments. In
cases where it is necessary to place rights -of -way on or near the ridge tops, grading for roadways shall be min-
imized to reduce visual scarring. The specific road alignments shall be based upon the following constraints:
1. Volume of traffic;
2. Topography;
3. Public safety;
4. Lot size and on- street parking needs; and
5. Drainage requirements.
F. Visitor parking. Parking bays for visitor parking are encouraged.
G. Emergency access. Emergency access shall be provided to open space areas, especially to the rear of dwell-
ings or dwelling groups.
H. Nonvehicular circulation. Separate pedestrian circulation and trail plans, according to the general plan,
shall be provided.
I. Clustering. Encourage clustering of homes and require protection of natural features such as large trees,
knolls, rock, outcroppings, riparian areas and scenic corridors. (Ord. 710 § 35 -10.8, 1996; 1991 code § 35-
10.8)
1835.060 Concept plan.
The city council shall approve a concept plan at the same time that it adopts an ordinance establishing an
HPUD district. The concept plan shall include a text and diagram or diagrams which specify:
A. The distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by
the plan.
B. The proposed distribution and location of major components of public and private transportation, sewage,
water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other facilities.
C. Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for conservation, development
and utilization of natural resources, where applicable.
D. A development regulation schedule establishing the physical standards for development including, but not
limited to, setbacks, building heights, building coverage and floor area ratios.
E. Design criteria and placement for all buildings and structures.
18 -59 (Revised 10111)
18.35.070
F. A statement of the relationship of the proposed rezoning to the general plan. (Ord. 710 § 35- 10.12, 1996;
1991 code § 35- 10.12)
1835.070 Planning commission, architectural review commission and city council action.
Before planning commission consideration of a proposed HPUD district, the architectural review commission
shall review the proposal and make recommendations to the planning commission. The planning commission
shall consider an application for rezoning to an HPUD district as prescribed in PHMC Chapter 18.125, and
shall at the same time consider the proposed HPUD concept plan accompanying the application. A planning
commission recommendation to rezone to the HPUD district shall be accompanied by a resolution approving
an HPUD concept plan.
A. Architectural review commission action. The architectural review commission may recommend approval
or conditional approval of a proposed HPUD concept plan upon finding that:
1. The design of the structures conforms to the topographic features of the particular site;
2. The design of the structures enhances the natural attributes of the particular site;
3. The scale and bulk of the structures are appropriate to the particular site; and
4. The HPUD is in substantial compliance with city -wide design guidelines.
B. Planning commission action. The planning commission may approve or conditionally approve an HPUD
concept plan upon finding that:
1. The HPUD concept plan is consistent with the adopted general plan and other applicable policies and is
compatible with surrounding development;
2. Deviations from the base district regulations are justified by compensating benefits of the HPUD plan;
3. The HPUD concept plan includes adequate provisions for utilities services, and emergency vehicle
access; and public service demands will not exceed the capacity of existing and planned systems; and
4. The HPUD concept plan has been reviewed by the architectural review commission.
C. City council action. After a public hearing, the council shall approve, modify, or reject the planning com-
mission's recommendation; provided, that a modification not previously considered by the planning commis-
sion shall be referred to the planning commission for a report prior to adoption of an ordinance amending the
zoning regulations or map. Failure of the planning commission to report within 40 days after referral or such
longer period as may be designated by the council shall be deemed approval of the proposed modification.
Prior to adoption of an ordinance, the council shall make findings that the proposed regulation or map amend-
ment is consistent with the policies of the general plan and the notice and hearing provisions of this title. (Ord.
856 § 2 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 710 § 35- 10.14, 1996; 1991 code § 35- 10.14)
18.35.080 Zoning map designation.
An HPUD district shall be noted by the designation "HPUD," followed by the ordinance number of the rezon-
ing approving the HPUD plan. (Ord. 710 § 35-10.18,1996; 1991 code § 35- 10.18)
1835.090 Development plan review.
Plans for a project in an HPUD district shall be accepted for final development site plan review as prescribed
by PHMC Chapter 18.90 and architectural review as prescribed by PHMC Chapter 18.115, only if they are
consistent with a valid HPUD plan.
Minor changes to an existing HPUD, as determined by the zoning administrator, shall not be subject to PHMC
Chapter 18.115, Architectural Review.
The zoning administrator shall determine what is major or minor and has the discretion to make minor changes
to an existing HPUD. Any interested person may appeal the zoning administrator's determination under
PHMC Chapter 18.130. (Ord. 710 § 35- 10.20, 1996; 1991 code § 35- 10.20)
(Revised 10111) 18 -60
3. East Bay Municipal Utility District, William R. Kirkpatrick, Manager of Water
Distribution Planning, May 29, 2012
EAST BAY
MUNICIPAL UTILITYDISTRICT RECEIVED
May 29, 2012
t'04, Y 31 2012
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Russell Leavitt, Environmental Coordinator
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration — Central Contra Costa
Sanitary District Annexation 183, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek
Dear Mr. Leavitt:
East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the
Negative Declaration for the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) Annexation 183
located in the cities of Orinda, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek. As Annexation Areas 1 through
5 are not located in EBMUD's service area as stated in the Initial Study, EBMUD's following
comments are limited to Areas 6 and 7 located in Orinda and EBMUD's service area.
WATER SERVICE
On page 37, under b) Discussion, the last sentence should be deleted and the following
should be added:
Project sponsors within annexation Areas 6 and 7 should contact EBMUD's New Business
Office and request a water service estimate to determine the costs and conditions ofproviding
water service to future and existing parcels. Depending on the final elevations and location of
houses on the parcels, water service may include, water main extensions, off site pipeline
improvements and/or a Limited Pressure Service Agreement(s), at the project sponsors'
expense. Off -site pipeline improvements include, but are not limited to, replacement of
existing pipelines to the project site to meet domestic and firellow requirements, the later set
by the local fire agency. A Limited Pressure Service Agreement recommends the installation
and maintenance of individual pumping facilities (hydropneumatic service), at the project
sponsors' expense, to maintain adequate pressure to each premise at all times.
If you have any questions concerning this response, please contact David J. Rehnstrom,
Senior Civil Engineer, Water Service Planning at (510) 287 -1365.
Sincerely,
William R. Kirkpatrick
Manager of Water Distribution Planning
WRK:ELE:sb
sbI2_o99.doc
375 ELEVENTH STREET. 04K1AND CA 946074240 , TOLL FREE 1 866 40 EBMUD
RESPONSE TO EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT COMMENTS
3A. The last sentence on page 37 under Discussion b) is hereby deleted and
replaced with the following text:
Project sponsors within Annexation Areas 6 and 7 should contact
EBMUD's New Business Office and request a water service
estimate to determine the costs and conditions of providing water
service to future and existing parcels. Depending on the final
elevations and location of houses on the parcels, water service
may include water main extensions, off -site pipeline
improvements and /or a Limited Pressure Service Agreement(s),
at the project sponsors' expense. Off -site pipeline improvements
include, but are not limited to, replacement of existing pipelines to
the project site to meet domestic and fire flow requirements, the
later set by the local fire agency. A Limited Pressure Service
Agreement recommends the installation and maintenance of
individual pumping facilities (hydropneumatic service), at the
project sponsors' expense, to maintain adequate pressure to
each premise at all times.
4. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, SCOTT MORGAN, DIRECTOR, JUNE 8, 2012
STATE OF CALIFORNIA A
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE of PLANNING AND RESEARCH s_�
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT .
EDMUND G. BROWN JR. KEN Alxx
GOVERNOR DIRECTOR
RECEIVED
June 8, 20I2
JUN 12 2012
Russell Leavitt ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553
Subject: CCCSD District Annexation 183 - Orinda, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek
SCH #: 2012052024
Dear Russell Leavitt:
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for
review. The review period closed on June 7, 2012, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date.
This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for 4A
draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the
environmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project, please refer to the
ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office.
Sincerely>
Scot
Dire :40010th S;ree; P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 958:2 -3G44
(916) 445 -0613 FAX , 9:6) 323 -30:8 www.opn. a.gov
RESPONSE TO STATE CLEARINGHOUSE COMMENTS
4A. Comment noted; no comments were received from State agencies.
Document Details Report
State Clearinghouse Data Base
SCM 2012052024
Project Tilde CCCSD District Annexation 183 - Orinda, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek
Lead Agency Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Type Neg Negative Declaration
Description CCCSD proposed to annex Into its service area 10 Orinda residential and utility parcels, 12 Pleasant
HUI residential and utility parcels, and 1 Walnut Creek residential parcel, for a total of 23 parcels.
Annexation will allow for the following associated, Indirect and secondary activities: sanitary sewer
extensions Into residential neighborhoods, abandonment of septic systems, and the connection of
existing and tuture residences to the public sewer system. The total growth possible in the annexation
area (due to the proposed annexation or not) Is estimated to be 42 singW4amUy residences.
Lead Agency Contact
Name Russel Leavitt
Agency Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Phone (925) 229 -7255 Fax
email
Address 5019 Imhoff Place
City Martinez State CA 27p 94553
Project Location
County Contra Costa
City Orinda, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek
Region
Lat /Long
Cross Streets multiple
Parcal No. multiple
Township Range Section Base
Proximity to:
Highways Hwy 4,24,1-680
Airports Buchanan Field
Railways BNRR
Waterways Walnut Creek, San Pablo Reservoir
Schools multiple
Land Use Multiple - various densities of Residential; Open Space, Semi- Public; Instihdkxml; Neighborhood
Business
Project Issues AesthetidVisual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic - storic; Biological Resources;
Drainage/Absorption; Flood Plain/Flooding; Forest Land/Fire Hazard; Geologk1Seism1c; Minerals;
Noise; Population/Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation/Parks; Schools/Universities; Septic
System; Sewer Capacity; Sol EroskWCompaction/Grading; Solid Waste; ToxiclHazardous;
Traif afCirculatim, Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetiand/Riparian; Growth Inducing;
Landuse; Cunwlative Effects
Reviewing Resources Agency; Departrnent of Fish and Game, Region 3; Department of Parks and Recreation;
Agencies Celtrans, Division of Aeronautics; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 4; State Water
Resources Control Board, Divison of Financial Assistance; Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Region 2; Native American Heritage Commission; Public Utilities Commission
Date Received 05/0912012 Start of Review 05/0912012 End of Review 06107/2012
Note: Blanks in data fields result from Insufficient information provided by lead agency.
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2012 - CPS47
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CENTRAL
CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT ANNEXATION 183 -
ORINDA, PLEASANT HILL AND WALNUT CREEK (DA 193) AND REQUESTING
THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION
COMMISSION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR A
CHANGE OF ORGANIZATION (DISTRICT ANNEXATION NO. 183)
WHEREAS, the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD) wishes to initiate
proceedings pursuant to the Cortese - Knox - Hertzberg Local Government
Reorganization Act of 2000 for a change of organization; and
WHEREAS, the change of organization is proposed for the following reasons:
Twenty -three (23) properties have been included in the areas proposed to be
annexed as "fill -in" parcels to streamline staff work and avoid the creation of
new islands inside CCCSD boundaries,
2. Four (4) of the properties within the areas proposed for annexation are
connected to the CCCSD public sewer system;
3. All twenty -three (23) properties are within the CCCSD Sphere of Influence, as
previously approved by the Contra Costa County Local Agency Formation
Commission. No other sewering agency can reasonably serve these areas;
4. All of the properties are within the Contra Costa County Urban Limit Line;
5. The area has been planned for residential use by the Cities of Orinda, Pleasant
Hill and Walnut Creek;
6. The residential density and location of some of the properties within the
watersheds of EBMUD drinking water reservoirs makes sewer service and
annexation to CCCSD prudent to avoid despoiling the creeks with septic
system effluent;
7. CCCSD already has collection facilities throughout Orinda, Pleasant Hill and
Walnut Creek;
8. Wastewater from Orinda, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek can flow by gravity or
individual residential pumping systems to CCCSD's existing collection system;
9. CCCSD will assume responsibility, upon annexation, for maintenance and
operation of public sewer facilities required to provide service to the areas
proposed to be annexed; and
10. CCCSD requires that all served properties annex to the District (CCCSD
Standard Specifications Section 3 -04).
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Resolution No. ,20/2 _0 y 7
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, the proposed change in organization consists of seven (7) "single areas"
(as defined by the State Board of Equalization) generally adjacent to the existing
CCCSD boundary, as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and designated
thereon as proposed Annexation Areas 183 -1 through 183 -7 (inclusive); said Exhibit
incorporated herein by reference, comprising a total of approximately 91 acres; and
WHEREAS, the only affected county is Contra Costa, in the incorporated cities of Orinda,
Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek, and no other sanitary districts are involved; and
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed to CCCSD is inhabited (12 or more
registered voters); and
WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is subject to the provisions of the CCCSD Code,
and if the annexation were approved, all of the provisions of said Code would become
applicable to the properties annexed, including the requirement that annexation
charges be collected at the time of connection to the public sewer system; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study has been conducted by CCCSD in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, CCCSD staff conclude that the Initial Study adequately, accurately, and
objectively evaluated the proposed effect of CCCSD Annexation 183 on the
environment; and
WHEREAS, adequate public notice was given to receive comments on the Initial Study
and proposed annexation; and
WHEREAS, the CCCSD Board of Directors reviewed the results of the Initial Study,
considered comments received, and determined that the project will not have a
significant effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, the CCCSD Board of Directors finds that the Negative Declaration reflects
its independent judgment of the environmental effects of the proposed project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the CCCSD Board of Directors as follows:
THAT adoption of this resolution will establish the Board of Directors' independent
finding that the environmental effects of annexing the areas shown on Exhibit A have
been adequately addressed in compliance with the CEQA and will constitute approval
of the Negative Declaration for CCCSD Annexation 183 - Orinda, Pleasant Hill and
Walnut Creek (DA 183). The Secretary of the District will be custodian of the document
and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings for the adoption of this
Negative Declaration. The record of proceedings will be maintained at CCCSD's
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Resolution No. Aol Z -o AJ7
Page 3 of 3
offices, 5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, California. Staff is directed to file any necessary
CEQA notices and /or documents with Contra Costa County.
THAT CCCSD District Annexation 183 is hereby approved and staff is directed to
submit this Resolution of Application requesting that the Contra Costa County Local
Agency Formation Commission initiate annexation proceedings for the seven (7) areas
shown and described in Exhibit A for proposed annexation areas 183 -1 through 183 -7
(inclusive), as authorized and in the manner required under the Cortese -
Knox- Hertzberg Reorganization Act of 2000, together with a complete application
package including all other required information, geographical descriptions, maps, forms,
questionnaires, indemnification agreement, fees, and a mailing list of affected property
owners, and of all other property owners and registered voters who reside within 300
feet of each of the proposed annexation areas.
THAT it is not the current practice of CCCSD to use its power under Health and Safety
Code Section 6520 to compel property owners to connect their properties to the public
sewer system involuntarily.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21 st day of June 2012, by the Board of Directors of the
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District by the following vote:
AYES: Members:
NOES: Members:
ABSENT: Members:
COUNTERSIGNED:
James A. Nejedly
President of the Board of Directors
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
Elaine R. Boehme, CIVIC
Secretary of the District
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
County of Contra Costa, State of California
Approved as to form:
Kenton L. Alm, Esq.
Counsel for the District
EXHIBIT A
Source: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Figure 1 -1 District Annexation 183 Areas 1 -7 — Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Orinda