A. Project Description  
  
The Applicant (Ware Malcomb) and Owner (CP Logistics Willow Pass, LLC) have applied for a land use permit to establish a warehouse at 4000 Evora Road in the unincorporated Bay Point area. The project site is two adjoining, vacant parcels (APNs 099-160-026 and 099-160-027) located northwest of Evora Court at the western terminus of Evora Road. The project site is within the Light Industrial (L-I) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of Light Industrial (LI). A warehouse may be established in an L-I zoning district with a land use permit.  
  
At the request of the Applicant, the project before the Board is a 98,460 square-foot warehouse rather than the 225,950 square-foot warehouse approved by the Zoning Administrator (ZA) and County Planning Commission (CPC). As described further below, the Applicant has requested approval of a reduced-size warehouse in an effort to respond to the appeal by DeNova Homes, Inc. The Applicant submitted a conceptual site plan for the 98,460 square-foot warehouse on May 13, 2020 that reduces the originally proposed warehouse by 56 percent.  
  
The proposed reduced 98,460 square foot warehouse project includes the following site improvements: a driveway that wraps around the warehouse; parking along the east and north elevations of the building that provide 140 parking spaces (where 99 parking spaces are required); 18 truck loading bays along the southern elevation of the building; trailer storage stalls to the west and south of the warehouse; 7 long-term bicycle spaces; exterior lighting consisting of building-mounted lights and lighting poles; perimeter and parking lot bio-retention basins and other stormwater drainage improvements that connect to existing onsite drainage swales and an offsite detention basin; and landscape plantings along the edges of the project site.  
  
The proposed warehouse would be of a contemporary modern architectural style with exterior walls of painted concrete panels interspersed with vision glass and tinted glass. Vertical design elements are incorporated along the (primary) north and east elevations. The “working” south elevation is characterized by its row of truck loading bays.  

B. CEQA Environmental Review of the 98,460 Square-Foot Warehouse  
  
A new 2021 Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for the reduced 98,460 square-foot warehouse project. The 2021 MND is based, in part, on the prior 2017 MND prepared for the 225,950 square-foot warehouse as many of the potential impacts for the two project versions are similar. The new 2021 MND also incorporates an updated transportation impact analysis. TJKM Transportation Consultants, the consultant on a retainer contract with the Department, submitted a transportation impact analysis (TIA) on the 98,460 square-foot warehouse on November 3, 2020. The TIA is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) that requires analysis of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for a proposed project, in place of a traffic level of service (LOS) analysis. The TIA found that the proposed 98,460 square-foot warehouse would not result in a significant adverse environmental impact. The 2021 MND constitutes the CEQA environmental review for the 98,460 square-foot warehouse.  
  
C. Procedural History  
  
The following is a summary of actions taken with respect to the project and the Appellant’s (DeNova Homes, Inc.) appeal of the project:

• August 7, 2017: The LP16-2031 application for a 225,950 square-foot warehouse on Evora Road was heard by the ZA. The ZA approved the land use permit and adopted a mitigated negative declaration for the project.
• August 17, 2017: DeNova Homes appealed the ZA decision approving LP16-2031. The August 2017 appeal and staff responses to the appeal comments are in the November 2017 CPC staff report.
• November 8, 2017: The CPC denied the appeal and upheld the ZA decision.
• November 20, 2017: DeNova Homes appealed the CPC decision on behalf of DeNova Homes. The November 2017 DeNova Homes appeal incorporates by reference the August 2017 appeal to the CPC and comments made by the Appellant's representative at the November 2017 CPC Meeting.

County staff and the Applicant have had numerous discussions with the Appellant regarding the appeal and Appellant’s concerns with the project. As a result, the Applicant has significantly modified the project by reducing the proposed warehouse square footage in response to the appeal. Staff believes the smaller warehouse and revised, recirculated MND address all of the concerns raised in the appeal.  
  
D. DeNova Homes Appeal  
  
In its appeal of the project and in discussions with staff since the appeal was filed, Appellant contends that the proposed warehouse at the project site is too large, the proposed warehouse will impact existing traffic deficiencies and safety hazards at the Willow Pass / Evora intersection, and the MND prepared for the proposed 225,960 square-foot warehouse is inadequate. Each of the Appellant’s appeal points, and staff’s analysis and response, are below. The Appellant contends that the proposed warehouse is too large for the project site, but relies on the Willow Pass Business Park CC&Rs and alleged impacts to the Willow Pass Business Park’s development capacity—neither of which is a basis to deny the requested land use permit.  
  
Willow Pass Business Park CC&Rs. The Willow Pass Business Park is adjacent to the project site. The Appellant alleges that the Willow Pass Business Park CC&Rs, which is not a County document, limit development of the project site to 100,000 square feet due to water supply concerns. Due, in part, to the appeal, the Applicant is now proposing a warehouse that is 98,460 square-feet in size.  
  
Willow Pass Business Park Development Capacity. The Appellant has stated that it believes that approval of the proposed warehouse would restrict development of the Willow Pass Business Park. Approval of the proposed warehouse has no effect on the remaining development capacity of the Willow Pass Business Park. The M-10 Willow Pass Business Park Mixed-Use designation in the General Plan Land Use Element, and Development Plan DP04-3096 for the Willow Pass Business Park, permits 357,500 square feet of development at the Willow Pass Business Park. The General Plan specifically states that the M-10 designation and the associated development allowance does not apply to the Applicant's project site. A total of 106,092 square feet of the allowed 357,500 square feet of development has been built as the Willow Pass Business Park, with an additional 90,000 square feet under construction and 7,998 square feet pending land use permit approval. Including this new and pending construction, 204,090 square feet have been developed or pending, resulting in a remaining development capacity of 153,410 square feet at the Willow Pass Business Park. The Appellant has asked the County to acknowledge this accounting of remaining development capacity at Willow Pass Business Park. Staff has tabulated the existing development and remaining development capacity at the Willow Pass Business Park in Attachment 7 (Willow Pass Business Park Development Capacity).  
  
Staff has identified no basis for determining that the originally proposed project is too large for the project site. The project is consistent with the General Plan, including the LI Light Industry General Plan land use designation, and the L-I Light Industrial zoning district. Nevertheless, the Applicant has attempted to resolve the appeal by proposing a 98,460 square-foot warehouse in place of the 225,950 square-foot warehouse. As described previously, the 98,460 square-foot warehouse reduces the originally proposed warehouse by 56 percent. The Applicant proposes this smaller warehouse as the project to be constructed.  
  
2. The Project will Impact Existing Traffic Congestion and Safety Hazards at the Willow Pass / Evora Intersection.   
  
The Appellant contends that the project will worsen existing traffic congestion, and pose a safety hazard, because there would be truck accidents due to the insufficient turning radius at the Willow Pass / Evora Road intersection. However, both the Appellant's consultant, Hexagon Transportation Consultants, and the Applicant's consultant, Abrams Associates, determined that trucks could make the turn at the Willow Pass /Evora intersection and found the turning radius to be acceptable. County staff has determined this turning radius to be acceptable.  
  
The 2020 TJKM TIA analyzes VMT, rather than LOS, as required under the current CEQA Guidelines. Applying the General Plan Growth Management Performance Standards for traffic, the 98,460 square-foot warehouse project is projected to generate 17 AM peak period and 19 PM peak period vehicle trips and will not significantly increase traffic levels in the area. Nevertheless, the Applicant will be required to comply with the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the East Contra Costa Regional Fee & Finance Authority/Regional Transportation Development Impact Mitigation and Bay Point Areas of Benefit (AOB) and make a fair-share AOB fee contribution.  
  
3. 2017 MND is Inadequate.   
  
The project has been revised due, in part, to the appeal, and a new MND was prepared. The new 2021 MND was circulated to the public, and the Appellant did not provide additional comments. Several of the appellant’s comments on the 2017 MND have been addressed in the 2021 MND or are no longer relevant due to changes in the regulatory requirements of CEQA. Appellant comments on the 2017 MND that might also apply to the new 2021 MND are addressed below.  
  
a. Transportation.   
  
Hexagon Peer Review: The appeal includes the November 17, 2017 peer review prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants of the Abrams TIA on the proposed warehouse. The Hexagon peer review determined that the Abrams TIA was inadequate and required revisions.  
  
Rather than revising the Abrams TIA, staff directed TJKM to prepare a new TIA to address the Hexagon comments. The resulting November 2018 TJKM TIA corroborated the findings of the Abrams TIA and responded to all of the Hexagon comments. Subsequently, the November 2020 TJKM TIA evaluated the 98,460 square-foot warehouse. The original 225,960 square-foot warehouse would generate 393 daily trips including 38 AM peak period trips and 43 PM peak period trips. In contrast, the reduced 98,460 square-foot warehouse would generate 171 daily trips including 17 AM peak period trips and 19 PM peak period trips. Given that the daily and peak period trips would be substantially lower for the reduced warehouse, there would not be any new significant adverse traffic impact with the 98,460 square-foot warehouse.  
  
Criteria for Significant Impact at LOS E and LOS F Intersections: The appeal states that the three percent threshold used for the LOS analysis in the existing plus project scenario is not correct. Current CEQA Guidelines require lead agencies to evaluate VMT and not LOS. Thus, the 2020 TJKM TIA and 2021 MND include assessment of transportation impacts based on VMT and conclude that the proposed 98,460 square-foot warehouse would not have any significant adverse transportation impact.  
  
Number of Project Truck Trips: The appeal states that the 2017 MND did not include information on the number of truck trips generated by the project, and that the MND did not state when those trips will occur despite mitigation measure Noise 1 limiting large trucks to the hours of 9:00 am to 4:00 pm Monday through Friday. The 2021 MND analyzes truck trips based on an Institute of Transportation Engineers metric that truck trips account for 20 percent of the weekday traffic. Noise 1 addresses noise reduction during project construction, including a restriction on large trucks. Noise 1 is included as Condition of Approval #49. Regarding when project trips will occur, the Applicant has not identified a tenant for the warehouse, and therefore, does not know specific operational characteristics of a future warehouse tenant.  
  
Roadway Wear and Tear: The appeal states that the MND should evaluate roadway wear and tear due to project truck trips. Typically, the County requires a project to address construction wear and tear by documenting the condition of the roadways with video in the area prior to construction. After construction is complete, the applicant is required to repair any areas where there is a degradation of pavement condition. In addition, the construction haul route is subject to County review and approval. Regarding the proposed project, future trucks will travel on County roadways for a very short segment between the project site and Highway 4. This potential impact is considered to be less than significant.  
  
b. Project Description:  
  
The Appellant states in its appeal that the project description is inadequate, but cites examples of inadequate project descriptions that are distinguishable from the current project. In contrast to the cited examples, the proposed warehouse project is consistent with the project site’s General Plan land use designation. The proposed project is permitted in the L-I Light Industrial zoning district with a land use permit. The project does not involve a General Plan amendment, rezoning, or subdivision. The project does not involve water rights, annexation, or reuse of sites with potentially hazardous materials. The project would conform to applicable air quality regulations. Accordingly, the information required of the projects in the examples cited in the appeal is not required for the proposed warehouse project.  
  
Unknown Details: The Appellant contends that the project description should include detail of the intended use of the warehouse, its hours of operation, the types of trucks, truck hours, the construction period, and the method of construction. The Applicant has not identified a tenant for the warehouse, and, therefore, does not know the exact use of the warehouse, its hours of operation, the types of trucks, or truck hours. Accordingly, inclusion of unknown information in the MND is not appropriate. Staff has determined that the project description satisfies the requirements of CEQA and includes the information necessary to complete the environmental assessments in the initial study.  
  
c. Other Environmental Topics:  
  
Lighting: The appeal states that the project is not analyzed against a threshold of significance for lighting. The County requires projects to have lighting directed downward and away from adjacent areas, with minimal light spillover. Adherence to these County requirements prevent potential lighting impacts. Moreover, the 2021 MND reports that the proposed project lighting would be consistent with industry standards for lighting required for safety of commercial/industrial building exterior areas and would be comparable to lighting of previously approved projects in the vicinity such as at the Willow Pass Business Park.  
  
Operation Noise: The appeal states that the MND does not analyze noise associated with project trucks along hauling routes or how that project trips combine with other future traffic. The 2021 MND discusses project trucks and that the associated noise would be generally below 80 dB, and generally below 74 dB at approximately 150 feet, the approximate distance to the currently developed portion of the Willow Pass Business Park.  
  
Construction Noise: The appeal states that the MND does not include a significance threshold for construction noise, or information on the types of construction equipment or the period for project construction. The 2021 MND states, based on the General Plan Noise Element, that noise levels of 75 dB are acceptable and noise levels of 80 dB are conditionally acceptable on industrial land. Thus, construction noise was identified as a significant impact as noise levels could be as high as 91 dB at a distance of 50 feet from the noise source. Mitigation measure Noise 1 was included to reduce the impact to a less than significant level.  
  
Construction-Related GHG Emissions: The appeal states that construction-related Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions were not analyzed. The 2021 MND GHG section analyzes construction-related GHG emissions.  
  
Operation-Related GHG Emissions: The appeal states that operation-related GHG emissions were incorrectly analyzed and should use the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) "brightline" threshold of 1,100 MTC02e per year. The BAAQMD GHG emissions threshold is any of the following: compliance with a qualified GHG reduction strategy or 1,100 MTC02e per year or 4.6 MTC02e per service population per year for commercial and industrial development projects. The 2021 MND, and the January 2017 Air Quality Impact and Greenhouse Gas Analysis by Rainey Planning and Management referenced in the MND, addresses project GHG emissions in relation to the December 2015 Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan, which is a qualified GHG reduction strategy. Mitigation measure Greenhouse Gas 2 directly addresses operation-related GHG emissions. Greenhouse Gas 2 is Condition of Approval #48.  
  
Fire and Sheriff Response Times: The appeal states that the MND does not include significance thresholds for fire and sheriff response times and does not include information on service calls generated by the project. The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District reviewed the proposed project and did not identify any issues related to providing fire protection service to the project. As reported in the 2021 MND, the nearest stations include Fire Station 86 located approximately 3.3 miles to the northeast in Bay Point and Fire Station 6 located approximately 4.0 miles to the southwest in Concord. Using an average travel speed of 35 miles per hour, an engine responding from Station 86 would take 6 minutes to reach the project site, and an engine from Station 6 would take 7 minutes to reach the project site. Both response times are considered acceptable.  
  
As reported in the MND, police services are provided by the Office of the Sheriff via patrol service to the Bay Point area. The area of the project site and adjacent Willow Pass Business Park is not considered a high crime area. During the November 1, 2018 to November l, 2019 time period, there were nine reported crimes in the area, in contrast to 85 reported crimes in the 94565 (Bay Point/Pittsburg) zip code area.  
  
CONCLUSION  
  
County staff has analyzed and responded to Appellant’s appeal. Additional analysis was conducted to address the Appellant’s concerns. Moreover, the Applicant has redesigned the project with a reduced-size warehouse proposal in response to the appeal. The proposed 98,460 square-foot warehouse is a 56 percent reduction in size from the original 225,950 square-foot warehouse. Staff recommends that the Board deny the appeal of DeNova Homes, Inc., and approve LP16-2031.