This hearing is to review the General Plan Amendment (CDGP07-00009), Rezoning (CDRZ09-03212), Major Subdivision (CDSD10-09280), Development Plan (CDDP10-03008), Tree Permit, Exception (from provision of Title-9), and Development Agreement elements of the proposed Tassajara Parks Residential Project. As further described below, on June 9, 2021, the County Planning Commission considered the project and passed a motion (4-2), recommending that the County Board of Supervisors deny the project.  
  
PROJECT DESCRIPTION  
  
The proposed Project includes the following initial discretionary approvals by the County:  
  
1. General Plan Amendment (Urban Limit Line Change): Change to the Urban Limit Line to include the 30-acre Residential Area of the Northern Site. This area will incorporate the proposed 125 residential lots and related urban improvements.  
  
2. General Plan Amendment (Land Use Change): Amendment to the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element by way of changing the existing Agricultural Lands (AL) designations of the Project Site to Single-Family Residential, High Density (SH), Parks and Recreation (PR), and Public/Semi-Public (PS) designations.  
  
3, Rezoning: Rezoning of the existing Exclusive Agricultural (A-80) zoning districts within the Project Site to a new project-specific Planned Unit (P-1) district.  
  
4. Vesting Tentative Map: Vesting Tentative Map to subdivide the Project Site into 125 single-family residential lots, open space parcels, a community park parcel, a detention basinparcel, a pedestrian staging area parcel, a sanitary sewer pump station parcel, and a San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District parcel.  
  
5. Development Plan: Preliminary and Final Development Plan to allow the construction of the Tassajara Parks Project with associated roadway, infrastructure, utility, and school parking lot improvements consisting of the following elements:

• Adopted Air Quality Plan Consistency: Since the Project would not achieve the per capita annual GHG emissions threshold of 4.6 MTCO2e/SP/yr established by the BAAQMD even after the application of all feasible mitigation measures, the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact with respect to conflicts with the GHG Reduction Goal of the BAAQMD’s Clean Air Plan. Mitigation is proposed requiring the implementation of feasible emissions reduction measures; however, these measures would not reduce emissions to less than significant levels.
• Greenhouse Gas Operational Emission Threshold: The Project would exceed the BAAQMD’s threshold of 4.6 MTCO2e/SP/yr for operational emissions due to sources including, but not limited to, vehicular traffic, on-site combustion of natural gas, off-site generation of electrical power, energy required to convey water and wastewater, and emissions associated with the hauling and disposal of solid waste. Mitigation is proposed requiring the implementation of feasible emissions reduction measures; however, these measures would not reduce emissions to less than significant levels.
• Near-Term Plus Project Freeway Operations: The Project would contribute vehicle trips to certain freeway segments and one intersection that would operate at unacceptable LOS levels under Near Term Plus Project Conditions. Mitigation is proposed; however, it would not fully reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
• Cumulative Plus Project Freeway Operations: The Project would contribute vehicle trips to certain freeway segments and intersections that would operate at unacceptable levels under Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. Mitigation is proposed; however, it would not fully reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
• Congestion Management Plan: The Project would contribute vehicle trips to certain Congestion Management Plan facilities that would operate at unacceptable levels. Mitigation is proposed; however, it would not fully reduce Project impacts to a level of less than significant.

• Air Quality: Construction and operation of the Project has the potential to: violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation; result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard; expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and generate direct and indirect GHG emissions that would result in a significant impact. All of the potentially significant impacts listed above can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Biological Resources: Construction of the Project has the potential for having an adverse effect on special-status plant and wildlife species; and adversely affecting federally protected wetlands. All of the potentially significant impacts listed above can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Cultural Resources: Construction of the Project has the potential for resulting in substantial adverse changes in the significance of previously undiscovered historical resources; substantial adverse changes in the significance of a previously undiscovered archaeological resource; directly or indirectly destroying a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature; and disturbing human remains. All of the potentially significant impacts listed above can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Geology, Soils, and Seismicity: Construction of the Project has the potential for exposing people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving seismic hazards; substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; being located on an unstable geologic unit or soil; and being exposed to hazards associated with expansive soils. All of the potentially significant impacts listed above can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Construction of the Project has the potential for creating a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. This potentially significant impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Hydrology and Water Quality: Construction and operation activites associated with the Project have the potential to degrade surface water quality in downstream water bodies. This potentially significant impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Land Use, Population, and Housing: Construction and operation activities associated with the Project have the potential to conflict with applicable East Bay Municipal Utility District annexation policies adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. This potentially significant impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Noise: Construction activities and operation of the Project have the potential for exposing persons to or the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan, noise ordinance, or other applicable standards of other agencies; and resulting in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity. All of the potentially significant impacts listed above can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Transportation and Traffic: Operation of the Project has the potential for substantially increasing hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use. This potentially significant impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level.
• Utilities and Service Systems: Operation of the Project has the potential for resulting in a need for additional water supplies, additional treatment capacity, or additional distribution facilities. This potentially significant impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level.

September 30, 2020 Planning Commission Hearing: The Tassajara Parks project was initially scheduled to be heard before the County Planning Commission on September 30, 2020. However, the applicant requested that the hearing be postponed to allow time for consideration of comments received from the proposed water purveyor, the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), on September 29, 2020. The project was subsequently rescheduled and heard before the County Planning Commission on June 9, 2021.  
  
Coordination with EBMUD Staff: Subsequent to the postponement of the September 30, 2020 County Planning Commission hearing, County staff worked with EBMUD staff and the applicant to discuss and address concerns detailed in their September 29, 2020, letter. The discussions between the parties focused on clarifying and providing supportive analysis for the feasibility of proposed conservation measures for offsetting the project’s water demand. The culmination of these discussions is a May 4, 2021, memorandum from the applicant’s consultant, Tully & Young, titled "Tassajara Parks Water Demand Offset Updated Preliminary Feasibility Analysis" (see “Water  
Conservation Measures Feasibility Memo & Associated EBMUD Comments” Attachment for this report and two related documents). The information in the memorandum is purely additional data to clarify and amplify the feasibility of the accelerated water conservation measures previously discussed in the project EIR and is not significant new information within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 and recirculation of the project EIR is not required. The rationale for staff’s determination is discussed in further detail below and in the "May 27, 2021 EBMUD Letters" section below.  
  
Added Conditions of Approval for Water Demand: Prior to the June 9, 2020, Planning Commission hearing and at the request of EBMUD staff, County staff developed additional recommended project conditions of approval (COAs) pertaining to the procurement of water to serve the project. In summary, the added COAs address the manner and timing in which water can be supplied to the project, final selection of the water conservation measures to be implemented for the project, water demand mitigation fees, provisions of the required agreement between the applicant and EBMUD, and annexation of the project site into EBMUD’s service area. The added conditions have been incorporated as staff’s recommended COAs #80-1 through #80-5. Staff provided a draft of these additional conditions to EBMUD staff, received written comments from EBMUD staff, and attempted to address the comments in the attached revised COAs.  
  
May 27, 2021 EBMUD Letters: After the applicant provided its water supply feasibility analysis and staff prepared the augmented COAs, EBMUD and a legal firm representing EBMUD (Barg Coffin Lewis & Trapp, LLP) submitted letters on May 27, 2021, reiterating EBMUD's opposition to the project and its assertion that the EIR should be recirculated. Specifically, the letters state that the EBMUD Board of Directors recently declared a Stage-1 drought and that the District’s water supplies are deficient for meeting the demand of their existing customers. The letters state that the additional water made available by the conservation measures proposed to accommodate the Project’s water demand must be, by District policy, made available to existing District customers to address supply deficiencies.  
  
Staff believes that the letters of EBMUD and their legal counsel do not present significant new information. The EIR and project description identify that water service to the project by EBMUD is subject to either an extraterritorial water service agreement or annexation into the EBMUD service area, and approval by EBMUD’s Board of Directors and the Local Agency Formation Commission. The EIR, at pages 3.9-37 through 3.9-41, identifies and analyzes the EBMUD policies referenced in both letters. Mitigation measure MM USS-1, implemented by recommended COA Nos. 80 and 80-1 through 80-5, requires the applicant to provide proof of water service to the Community Development Division prior to filing any final map. Proof of water service must be in the form of a written communication from EBMUD confirming the availability of water service for the project site. The EBMUD Board of Directors will ultimately determine if and when the project can be provided water service. The EIR includes a robust water supply analysis which accounts for drought conditions due to California’s well-known pattern of dry conditions. Water Supply Assessment requirements established by SB 610 outline the information and analysis that must be included in a CEQA document prepared for certain projects of a specified size and composed of certain land-uses (e.g., subdivisions larger than 500 residential units). For such covered projects, the Water Supply Assessment must assess whether projected water supplies identified to serve a proposed project will be sufficient to meet existing and planned water demands over a 20-year horizon. SB 610 requires the assessment of water supply sufficiency in single-dry years and multiple-dry years—not just under normal, or average, hydrologic conditions. Although the proposed project is not a covered project under SB 610, the EIR’s Water Supply Evaluation (Appendix J) utilized the analytical framework required by SB 610 for Water Supply Assessments, including incorporating drought conditions in the evaluation. Accordingly, the EIR’s Water Supply Evaluation incorporates single-year and multiple-year drought conditions in its analysis of project water demand and water supply sufficiency. County staff has appreciated the opportunity to work with EBMUD staff to better understand their concerns and believes the analysis and new COAs are responsive to these concerns. However, staff believes that significant new information has not been presented such that the EIR would need to be recirculated.  
  
Staff also believes that the “Tassajara Parks Water Demand Offset Updated Preliminary Feasibility Analysis” memorandum prepared by the applicant does not present significant new information. The EIR identified the environmental impact of the project’s water demand and identified as a mitigation measure that prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant must demonstrate to the County that all required approvals to implement provision of water to the Project have been obtained. The EIR further analyzed water availability and identified measures that would result in a demand offset of up to 2 million gallons per day. The EIR identified that the water demand offset could be achieved through offsite water conservation measures by accelerating currently planned conservation and/or expanding conservation beyond currently planned levels approved in the Water Supply Management Program 2040 (WSMP) within EBMUD’s service area by an amount that offsets the project’s water demand. The EIR recognized that the applicant, in consultation with EBMUD, would use information from the WSMP 2040 to develop the preferred conservation elements to be accelerated or expanded. The memorandum supplements the information in the EIR by detailing the likely success of certain proposed “Level E” water conservation measures in response to EBMUD comments regarding the feasibility of implementing the conservation measures. Staff’s added COAs do not constitute a new or modified project mitigation, but reinforce what is stated in the EIR—that implementation of offsite water conservation measures to offset the project’s water demand will be done in consultation with and approved by EBMUD. Absent the memorandum and additional COAs, the EIR accurately identifies the project-specific impacts on water demand and a method for reducing those impacts to a less than significant level.  
  
EBMUD Resolution: On June 8, 2021, prior to the Project being heard before the County Planning Commission, the EBMUD Board of Directors considered the Project and adopted a resolution that formally declared the District's opposition to annexing the project site into the District's service area, found the Project inconsistent with the District's annexation policies, and made findings and declarations regarding the unavailability of water to serve the Project. The signed resolution has been included as an attachment to this report.  
  
San Ramon and EBRPD Approve Preservation Agreement: Both the City of San Ramon and EBRPD have brought the Preservation Agreement before their governing bodies for consideration. The San Ramon City Council unanimously approved Resolution 2020-114 on November 24, 2020, which authorizes the Mayor of San Ramon to execute the Agreement. Similarly, the EBRPD Board of Directors voted unanimously to approve Resolution No. 2020-12-286 on December 1, 2020, which authorized their District General Manager to execute the Agreement. The Preservation Agreement is further discussed in the "Preservation Agreement" Section below.

  
Among other things, Measure C-1990 (approved by the County’s voters) established the County’s Urban Limit Line (“ULL”) to implement and enforce the 65/35 Land Preservation Standard. The Measure  
C-1990 ULL was subsequently incorporated into the County General Plan and County Ordinance Code. In 2004, County voters approved Measure J. Among other things, Measure J required the County and all cities within the County to have a voter-approved urban limit line, developed and maintained in accord with the "Principles of Agreement for Establishing the Urban Limit Line" (collectively, “Principles”), to receive the sales tax proceeds from Measure C-1988. In November 2006, County voters approved Measure L. Among other things, Measure L: (1) extended the term of the 65/35 Land Preservation Standard to December 31, 2026; and (2) required a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Board (after making one or more specified findings based on substantial evidence) and voter approval to expand the ULL by more than thirty (30) acres.  
  
The Project includes a proposal to expand the ULL to include the 30-acre Residential Development Area on the Northern Site (as those terms are defined in the Project’s EIR). Changes to the ULL are governed by the County’s ULL policies that implement the voter-approved ULL and are reflected in Chapters 1 and 4 of the General Plan and in Chapter 82-1 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Section 82-1.018 of the County Code provides that a proposal to expand the ULL by 30 acres or less does not require voter approval, but requires approval by a four-fifths vote of the Board after a public hearing and making one or more of specified findings. One such finding is that a majority of the cities that are party to a preservation agreement and the county have approved a change to the urban limit line affecting all or any portion of the land covered by the preservation agreement. As described in the Project Findings, the County, the City of San Ramon, and the EBRPD are considering entering into a preservation agreement that would support the finding (San Ramon and EBRPD have approved the preservation agreement).

Precedent for Repeated ULL Modifications: Approval of this Project or the Preservation Agreement will not directly facilitate any future change to the ULL. Any future proposal to change the ULL must comply with the requirements found in the County’s General Plan and Ordinance Code. Moreover, and as more fully discussed in the Project’s EIR, additional acreage would not be “at risk” of being moved inside the ULL with approval of the Project for the following reasons:  
  
1. Most of the privately-owned parcels abutting the ULL in the area of the project site are inherently unsuitable for urban development due to significant physical constraints;  
2. The Project includes growth-deterring components that are unique to the Project Site through the dedication of approximately 727 of acres of land to public entities for preservation in perpetuity. The publicly-owned and/or controlled lands will abut approximately 1.5 miles of the adjusted ULL boundary in the Tassajara Valley. The Project will essentially create a physical “green buffer” along portions of the ULL boundary that will effectively preclude opportunities for future ULL expansions in this area of the County.  
3. Many properties that have been identified as purportedly “at risk” of being pursued for inclusion within the ULL are already government-owned and/or controlled.  
  
Land Uses: The entire Project Site is located within an Agricultural Lands (AL) General Plan Land Use designation. As part of the proposed Project, the applicant seeks approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the 30-acre Residential Development Area to a Single-Family Residential High Density (SH) designation, the 7-acre San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District portion in the Southern Site to a Public/Semi-Public (PS) designation, and the remaining portions of the Project Site to a Parks and Recreation (PR) designation.  
  
The primary uses permitted within the SH designation are detached single-family residences, accessory structures, and duplexes or duets in specified areas with conventional zoning. Secondary uses typically considered to be compatible include home occupations, small residential care and childcare facilities, places of worship, accessory dwelling units, and other uses and structures incidental to the primary uses. The Project proposes the construction of 125 single-family residences, a sanitary sewer pump station, community park, and related on-site street, utility, and landscaping improvements within the 30-acre area to be designated as SH, which will be substantially consistent with the permitted land uses.  
  
The PS designation allows for a wide variety of public and private uses including, but not limited to, libraries, fire stations, schools, and public and private transportation and utility corridors. The 7-acre portion of land within the Southern Site that has been contingently offered to the SRVFPD will be designated as PS. This property has been offered for the SRVFPD’s future use in a manner that is consistent with the ULL. The SRVFPD has not yet accepted this contingent offer of dedication nor has it identified a potential future use or timeline for development of this property. However, if and when the District decides to pursue development on this property, a discretionary land use permit approval from the County would be required (as described in the proposed P-1 zoning).If this offer is not accepted by the SRVFPD, then the parcel will be dedicated to EBRPD.  
  
Land uses deemed appropriate for establishment within the PR designation are passive and active recreation-oriented activities, and ancillary commercial uses such as snack bars, and restaurants. The primary improvements proposed within the PR-designated areas of the Northern Site include constructing the Pedestrian Staging area, a pedestrian trail, community park, and detention basin. No urban development is proposed for the PR-designated portion of the Southern Site as part of the Project. Only park, recreation, open space, scenic, agriculture, grazing, wetland preservation and creation, and habitat mitigation land uses will be permitted under the proposed General Plan land use designations and P-1 zoning, as further reflected in the recommended conditions of approval and future conservation easement and conveyance instrument to the EBRPD.  
  

Density: The SH designation allows for densities between 5.0 and 7.2 single-family units per net acre. Based on the net acreage of 22.40 acres and the proposal for 125 single family lots, the proposed density for the SH-designated portion of the Northern Site is 5.58 units per net acre. There are no density standards applicable within the PS and PR designations. Based on the above, the density of the proposed Project will be consistent with the allowed range detailed in the County General Plan.  
  
Property Size: The General Plan Land Use Element indicates that sites within the SH designation can range up to 8,729 square feet. Lots within the 30-acre Residential Development Area will range between 5,000 and 12,744 square feet in area, with 26 of those lots exceeding the listed range. Although the General Plan provides a range of property sizes for the SH designation, it is simply a discussion of the lot sizes that are anticipated in the designation based on the density range, and not a hard standard that prohibits development beyond the range. Additionally, a majority of the proposed lots (approx. 79%) will be 8,729 square feet or less. Both the PR and PS designations lack discussion of a desired or anticipated property size for the designation since residential uses are not permitted within these land  
use designations.  
  
Implementation Measure 3-h (Job/Housing Balance): The General Plan states development applications for residential developments of 100 or more units must address the impact of that development upon the subregional jobs/housing balance (Land Use Implementation Measure 3-h).  
  
The proposed Project includes the construction of 125 single-family homes and related improvements with substantial park, recreation, and open space components in the Tassajara Valley area of unincorporated Contra Costa County. The Central County Region had an estimated 193,693 households and 230,950 jobs in 2010 per the Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) Projections 2013. To meet the jobs/housing goals provided by ABAG, the Central County area is anticipated to add an additional 41,761 households and 79,924 jobs by 2040. The proposed Project contributes to the anticipated housing development in the Central County subregion.  
  
Specific Area Policies: The Land Use Element of the County General Plan provides policies for specific geographic areas of the unincorporated County. These specific area policies focus on providing additional policies that pertain to the unique characteristics and needs of each identified area. Pursuant to Figure 3-2 of the County General Plan, the Project Site is not located within any of the identified  
specific policy areas.  
  
Growth Management Element: The Growth Management Element of the General Plan establishes measures of effectiveness and requirements for the analysis of circulation impacts associated with new land developments. Trip generation calculations for development projects are typically based on resources and methodology contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) publication. However, as explained more fully in the Project EIR, more conservative trip generation rates, provided by the Town of Danville, were used for analyzing the residential element of this Project. Since the ITE lacks similar uses in their Trip generation manualgeneration rates for the pedestrian staging facility was based on a conservative number of associated parking spaces. The total daily trip generation rate for the Project was 1,632 (including consideration of the formerly proposed equestrian staging area, which no longer is included as part of the Project), which necessitated a Traffic Impact Study (TIS).  
  
The Growth Management Program (GMP) of the County General Plan utilizes Level of Service (LOS)data to analyze traffic service standards within the County. LOS is a grading system which qualitatively characterizes traffic conditions associated with varying levels of traffic ranging from LOS-A indicating free-flow traffic conditions, to LOS-F indicating congested conditions where traffic flows exceed design capacity and result in long ques and delays. Policy 4-2 of the GMP indicates that new development shall be deferred unless infrastructure can be provided which meets the traffic LOS and performance standards outlined in Table 4-1, or otherwise assured. Furthermore, Table 4-1 of the GMP identifies minimum traffic standards based on specific land use types. Based on the proposed higher density and relatively small lot configuration, the Growth Management Element identifies the Residential Development Area of the Project Site as an “Urban” area. Pursuant to Table 4-1 (Growth Management Performance Standards) of the GMP, the Peak Hour LOS for “Urban Areas” such as the Project Site shall be a LOS Level of High D or better. As discussed in Section 3.12.6 (Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures) and shown in Table 3.12-7 (Existing Plus Project Conditions Intersection Delay and LOS) of the RDEIR, the Project would generate new trips that would contribute to unacceptable operations at two intersections. Even after incorporation of a mitigation requiring the payment of Tri-Valley Transportation Development (TVTD) fees to contribute to the construction of planned freeway and roadway improvement in the surrounding area, this impact could not be reduced to a less than significant level and thus is considered as a significant and unavoidable impact of the Project.

increase in calls for fire protection and emergency medical services, close proximity (0.35 miles) of Station #36, sufficient site access for emergency, and the likeliness that response time goals provided for within the General Plan can be met.  
  
2.Police Protection: As explained more fully in the Project EIR, the Project Site is in an area of the County served by the County Sheriff’s Office. The population increase of 375 people anticipated for the Project represents less than one percent of the Sheriff’s Office current service population and would only result in a nominal increase in calls for law enforcement. In addition, throughout DCD’scommunication with the Sheriff’s Office on the Project, there has been no indication that the Project would result in the need for new or expanded Sheriff facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives.  
  
3. Water: The Project Site is not currently located within the service area of a public water supplier, but is physically adjacent to the service area for the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). To ensure the availability of water for the Project, the applicant has proposed to aide EBMUD by funding accelerated or expanded off-site “Level-E” water conservation measures within EBMUD’s existing service area. The accelerated conservation would in turn offset the additional EBMUD water demand created by the Project. EBMUD has not defined a timetable for implementation of Level E measures since this would be heavily dependent upon the availability of funding, among other considerations; nor did it identify specific funding source(s) for same; therefore, acceleration of the implementation of these measures through funding provided by the Project proponent would allow EBMUD to accommodate the estimated Project water demand through its existing supply in a manner that would otherwise not occur.  
  
A Water Supply Evaluation (WSE) (see Appendix J) and letter report from an independent third party (see Appendix N to the FEIR) have been prepared, and the FEIR has found that a water demand between 47.9 and 91.7 acre-feet per year (AFY) will be created by the Project. EBMUD’s Water Supply Management Program (WSMP) 2040 contains Level-E conservation measures that, when implemented, could provide water conservation of 2 million gallons per day (mgd) above that which is needed to serve the Project. This water supply strategy is contingent upon Contra Costa LAFCO’s approval of annexing the Project Site into the EBMUD service area, and the EBMUD Board’s approval of an agreement between EBMUD and the applicant to fund the Level-E accelerated conservation measures. Funding will be defined in part by the conservation offset that would be negotiated with EBMUD, and which would be subject to the approval of the EBMUD Board of Directors. The WSE indicates there is sufficient water available to meet Project demands during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years.  
  
To further support the proposed water demand offset approach and address concerns raised by EMUD staff, the Applicant has prepared a memorandum titled “Tassajara Parks Water Demand Offset Updated Preliminary Feasibility Analysis”, which details the analysis administered to determine the feasibility of using Level-E accelerated conservation measures to ensure the availability of water in excess of that needed for the Project. Based on supporting empirical data, the analysis utilizes assumptions suggested by EBMUD staff and incorporates assumptions from other water providers that have had success implementing similar water conservation measures (e.g., the cities of San Antonio, Tuscon, and Sacramento). The analysis determined that leak repair assistance programs, program-funded toilet installation, rebates for installation of graywater systems, and programs for onsite water reuse could conserve water to offset the demand for the project. Feasibility of these programs was determined by using the EBMUD-suggested minimum offset threshold of 170 acre-feet per year, analyzing market potential based on current EBMUD Customer Assistance Program enrollment, program cost estimates, and water savings.  
  
Because delivery of this water supply will require the approval of other public agencies (i.e., EBMUD and LAFCO), the Project is conditioned to require that all such approvals be obtained prior to proceeding with development. To further ensure impacts are fully mitigated and taking into account the foregoing, the County has conditioned the Project such that the Project developer will be required to enter into the above-referenced binding agreement with EBMUD that provides for the Project to fully accommodate its identified demand at a minimum of 56.3 AFY or the amount ultimately confirmed by EBMUD, whichever is greater. The County also has conditioned the Project on requiring specified water conserving features and limits on total demand to be included as enforceable provisions in the Project’s CC&Rs, and that penalties could be levied against individual homeowners for violating these provisions, to help ensure compliance. This is  
consistent with the method successfully used in the Alamo Creek development.  
  
In the event the County Board of Supervisors approves the project as recommended by staff, the 30-acre Residential Development Area would need to be annexed within EBMUD's sphere of influence, Ultimate Service Boundary, and Service Area prior to public water services being provided. Annexation to these areas would require than an application be submitted to LAFCO, which in this case will likely be in the form of a petition executed by the landowners of the project site. LAFCO boundary change processing procedures indicate that in the event annexation into the territory of a special district is not filed by the district, a copy of the proposal is provided to that district, the proposal is placed on a LAFCO meeting agenda for "information purposes", and then a 60-day waiting period is observed before the proposal is placed on the LAFCO Commission's agenda for action. The 60-day waiting period provides the affected district with an opportunity to request that LAFCO terminate the proceedings.  
  
4. Sanitary Sewer: The Project Site is not currently located within the service area of a public sanitary sewer provider, but is physically adjacent to the service area of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (CCCSD). As explained more fully in the Project EIR, the CCCSD Sanitary District Treatment Plant (SDTP) has a permitted treatment capacity of approximately 53.8 million gallons per day (mgd), and actively treats an average of approximately 45 mgd. The Project is estimated to demand approximately 0.04 mgd once fully operational. This increase would represent less than 0.5 percent of the SDTP’s available 8.8 mgd of available treatment capacity. Based on the above, the Project would not require expansion or the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities. The Project includes an on-site pump station and a new underground connection that would link the Residential Development Area to an existing eight-inch sewer line located within Camino Tassajara. The implementation of this public sanitary sewer service design is contingent upon Contra Costa LAFCO approval to annex the Project Site in to the CCCSD service area.

The Project will be conditioned (COA #42) to require that staff of the County Building Inspection and Community Development Divisions verify compliance with the Appendix-E standards mentioned above, prior to approval of building permits for the proposed residences. Furthermore, California Code of Regulations Title 24 (Part 6, Energy Code) and Title 20 (Appliance Efficiency Regulation) will also apply to residence design at the project site.

4. Safety Element: Since the Safety Element has the potential for affecting land use policies within the County, the policies, goals, and implementation measures of the Safety Element are closely coordinated with that of the Land Use Element. For example, seismic safety considerations in an area may be cause for additional consideration with respect to lowering density or altering design standards on hillsides. During the environmental review phase of the Project, existing characteristics of the site were analyzed by the County to identify potential safety hazards. In addition, agencies including, but not limited to the County Sheriff, SRVFPD, and County Health Services Department, reviewed the Project during the environmental review phase to determine the potential existence of safety risks. There has been no indication from the reviewing agencies that the proposed Project would result in a significant safety hazard associated with the services and regulations under their purview. County staff’s analysis and as further described in the EIR, determined that fire protection response times, facility capacity to serve, and compliance with other General Plan standards will not be adversely impacted due to the proximity of the SRVFPD Station #36, and the applicant’s requirement to pay applicable development impact fees. The Project has also been conditioned (COA #30) to require that an annual special tax be assessed on each residential lot of the development to maintain and augment the law enforcement services to be provided by the County Sheriff’s Department.

ZONING  
  
Residential Lots: The Project includes an application for approval of a vesting tentative subdivision map, which will allow the creation of up to 125 residential lots and other special use lots within the designated 30-acre Residential Development Area. The proposed lots will range in size from 5,000 square feet to approximately 12,744 square feet in area, and will be developed with single-family residences constructed in compliance with the design standards of the project-specific P-1 district. The floor plan designs will consist of at least four floor plan elevations, and the applicable setbacks, yards, and building heights will vary based on the size and location characteristics of each lot. Except as explicitly modified by the design standards of the P-1 district, development of the residential lots will be guided by standards set forth in the R-6 Single-Family Residential zoning district.  
  
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION  
  
In addition to Camino Tassajara, a portion of the subdivision fronts Finley Road. Finley Road is a 21-foot wide road in a 50-foot easement. It is planned to be a 40-foot road in a 60-foot right of way. The Applicant will be required to dedicate a 30-foot half width right of way consistent with the previous dedication on the adjacent southern parcel. This width shall be adjusted accordingly to eliminate the angle points in the existing easement. The minimum centerline radius required for arterial streets per the County Ordinance Code is 650 feet. Said Code also requires construction of a 20-foot wide half-width street along the Project frontage of Finley Road.  
  
The project’s Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report (RDEIR) cites several mitigation measures relative to traffic impacts resulting from this Project. These have been included in the recommended conditions of approval (attached) and noted with the corresponding mitigation measure cross-reference (MM TRANS-XX).  
  
Taking into consideration that only a relatively small 30-acre portion of the Project Site is proposed to be developed and the vast majority of the Project Site will remain undeveloped and outside the Urban Limit Line, the applicant is seeking several exception requests (as referenced above); the standards for which the applicant is seeking these exceptions are focused on roadway and related improvements that are not typically imposed on rural subdivisions such as the Project. These include:

• Section 96-14.002 Improvement of County Streets
• Chapter 96-6 Street Lighting
• Section 96-12.202 Conditions Requiring Curbs
• Section 96-8.402 Locations (Sidewalks)
• Chapter 96-10 Underground Utilities
• Section 914-2.004 Offsite Collect and Convey Requirements

Support for these exception requests are included in responses to the three required findings prescribed by the Ordinance Code. As explained more fully in the attached findings, the basis for the requested exceptions focus on the following: the typical standards, which are intended for urban development, should not be applied to improvements beyond the ULL, and would otherwise be inconsistent with County precedent relative to road improvements in agricultural areas and the goal of maintaining the general vicinity in its rural residential nature. In general, Public Works is not opposed to the granting of these exceptions provided the exceptions specify the limits as to where these exceptions are applicable.  
  
The Vesting Tentative Map includes off-site access modifications and improvements to the parking lot serving Tassajara Hills Elementary School immediately west of the subdivision. These improvements including signal modifications will need to be coordinated with the School District, State Department of General Services (DGS) - Division of the State Architect, and the County Public Works Department.

Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code requires that all storm water entering and/or originating on the Project Site to be collected and conveyed, without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage system, to an adequate natural watercourse having a definable bed and banks or to an existing adequate public storm drainage system which conveys the storm waters to an adequate natural watercourse. Storm waters on the Northern Site originate in the hillside to the north and generally sheet-flow southerly to a tributary of Tassajara Creek north of Camino Tassajara. This tributary flows southeasterly, parallel with Camino Tassajara, where it joins Tassajara Creek east of Finley Road.  
  
With the residential development of the Northern Site, the Applicant proposes to install a detention basin to reduce overall peak flow rates to 20% below existing runoff rates and provide the necessary hydromodification required per the applicable provisions of the County’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (see below). Said detention basin shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the applicable County Flood Control District’s Detention Basin Guidelines. This basin will NOT be maintained by the County. The GHAD or an alternate maintenance entity approved by the Public Works Department will accept this facility for maintenance.

The Project Site is not annexed into the lighting district. The Applicant will be required, as a condition of approval (COA #103), to annex into the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2010-1 formed for the Countywide Street Light Financing