City of Fairfield - Hawthorne Mill Project Draft EIR/EIS
Michael Brandman Associates H\Client (PN-JN)\2097\20970002\2 - Screencheck EIR\20970002_Sec99-00 Appendix Dividers.doc
Appendix L: 404(b)(1) Alternatives Analysis
404(b)(1) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Edenbridge Hawthorne Mill Development
Fairfield, California October 2012
Prepared For: Katharine OesterreichEdenbridge Homes 153 Second Street Los Altos, CA 94022 (650) 917-1311
Prepared By: Phil Greer Andrea Bellanca WRA, Inc. Carlson, Barbee, & Gibson 2169 E. Francisco Blvd. 6111 Bollinger Canyon Road San Rafael, CA 94901 San Ramon, CA 94583 (415) 454-8868 (925) 393-2572
Ella Foley Gannon Bingham McCutchen LLP Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111
(415) 393-257
2
404(b)(1) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS FOR
EDENBRIDGE HAWTHORNE MILL DEVELOPMENT
FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA
I. INTRODUCTION
Edenbridge ("the Applicant") is seeking to construct Hawthorne Mill East (“the Project”), a transit oriented, mixed-use development to support the creation of a vibrant community surrounding the future Capitol Corridor Train Station in the City of Fairfield. Construction of the Project will result in the placement of fill in 37.75 acres of waters of the United States. Therefore, Edenbridge has filed an application for an individual Section 404 permit with the Corps of Engineers (“Corps”).
In order for the Corps to issue a Section 404 permit, it must make a finding that the Project complies with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Among other things, this requires the Corps to determine that a proposed authorization is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative ("LEDPA") which can satisfy the project applicant's purpose. To assist the Corps, the Applicant has analyzed potential off-site alternatives and four on-site alternatives to the project. This document presents the Applicant’s analysis of these potential alternatives and demonstrates that the proposed Project is the LEDPA.
II. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF THE 404(b)(1) ANALYSIS
Any activity requiring an individual permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act must undergo an analysis of alternatives in order to identify the LEDPA pursuant to the requirement of the guidelines established by the EPA, known as the 404(b)(1) Guidelines. The Guidelines prohibit discharge of dredge or fill material to waters of the United States if there is a "practicable alternative to the proposed discharge that would have less impact on aquatic ecosystem, provided that the alternative does not have other significant environmental consequences." [40 C.F.R. § 230.10(a).]. An alternative is practicable "if it is available and capable of being done after taking into consideration cost, existing technology and logistics in light of the overall project purposes." [40 C.F.R. §§ 230.10(a) and 230.3(q).] "If it is otherwise a practicable alternative, an area not presently owned by an applicant which could reasonably be obtained, utilized, expanded or managed in order to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed activity may be considered." [40 C.F.R. § 230.10(a)(2).] Thus an alternative must meet the overall project purpose, the purpose for which the applicant submits the request for fill authorization, and must be consistent with cost, logistical and availability criteria to be deemed the LEDPA
3
If the proposed activity would involve a discharge into a special aquatic site such as a wetland, the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines distinguish between those projects that are water dependent and those that are not. A water dependent project is one that requires access to water to achieve its basic purpose, such as a marina. A non-water dependent project is one that does not require access to water to achieve its basic purpose, such as a housing development. Here, the Proposed Project is not water dependent.
The Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines establish two presumptions for non-water dependent projects that propose a discharge into a special aquatic site, such as a wetlands. First, it is presumed that there are practicable alternatives to non-water dependent projects, "unless clearly demonstrated otherwise." [40 C.F.R. § 230.10(a)(3).] Second, "where a discharge is proposed for a special aquatic site, all practicable alternatives to the proposed discharge which do not involve a discharge into a special aquatic site are presumed to have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, unless clearly demonstrated otherwise." [Id.] The thrust of the Guidelines is that applicants should design proposed projects to meet the project purpose while avoiding impacts to aquatic environments. This approach is emphasized in a Memorandum of Agreement between the EPA and the Corps Concerning the Determination of Mitigation Under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (1990) ("MOA"). The MOA articulates the Guidelines "sequencing" protocol as first, avoiding impacts, second, minimizing impacts, and third, providing practicable compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts with a preference for on-site, in-kind mitigation and no overall net loss of functions and values.
In addition to requiring the identification of the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative, the Guidelines mandate that a project must not violate any applicable toxic effluent standard or prohibition, 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(b)(2), jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species (or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat), 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(b)(3), cause or contribute to violations of any applicable state water quality standard, 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(b)(1), or cause or contribute to significant degradation of waters of the United States, 40 C.F.R. § 230.10(c). Prior to completing its review, the Corps also must evaluate the proposed project in light of the public interest. Finally, the Corps must ensure that its environmental review complies with the National Environmental Policy Act, codified at 42 U.S.C § 4321 et. seq.
4
III. PROJECT PURPOSE
A. Statement of Project Purpose
The proposed Project is designed to create a vibrant transit oriented development and transportation hub by providing an opportunity for creation of commercial and retail services within walking and biking distance of residential uses and regional transportation services, in this case a future train station, and thereby relieve congestion on local and regional roadways. The project is also designed to meet the housing needs of the City of Fairfield.
The Project purpose is to provide approximately 510-780 residential units in close proximity to the future train station. Higher density housing and retail and commercial uses must be provided and located adjacent and within a half mile of the train station. For transit planners, the half mile radius around a transit station or transit hub is the generally accepted distance people will walk to access the station. (Canepa [1], MTI [2], MTC [3]). The statistics for how far people will bike is 60% of all bike trips are one mile or less (2009 NHTS [4]). The project must provide pedestrian friendly neighborhoods which encourage the use of pleasing pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes and trails. The project must provide a mixture of housing types including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, and high density multifamily, each created to provide viable, integrated neighborhood communities. The definition of “integrated” as used here means the communities have been designed to blend into a functioning or unified whole. There must be continuous connectivity, and the neighborhoods must not be physically separated. Additionally, the project must include community facilities, such as parks, open space and shared facilities such as the proposed community pool, in order to create a unified/integrated community. The project must provide mixed use retail and commercial uses which enhance the pedestrian experience. It must maximize pedestrian and bicycle connections between the residential and commercial uses and the future train station. It must lessen the job-housing imbalance existing in the City of Fairfield by providing commercial and retail services. It must also preserve and protect important natural resources.
B. Statement of Project Need
The City of Fairfield and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers each view the project purpose from the purview of their responsibilities. The City is interested in the orderly development of lands within its jurisdiction and within the city limits, and to provide residential, retail and commercial support for their future train station. The Corps' interest extends to its permit authority with respect to regulation of waters of the United States.
Project Purpose and Need: City of Fairfield Considerations
Because a large portion of the Hawthorne Mill East project is immediately adjacent to the future Capitol Corridor Train Station and portions of the site lie within easy walking and biking distance of the train station, the proposed residential and commercial uses are designed to help meet the City's goal of: (1) maximizing the long-term land use opportunities presented by the train station, by including a broad and intense mix of residential, employment and retail uses within walking and biking distance of the station; (2) maximizing pedestrian and bicycle access between the residential, retail and commercial development and the train station; (3) meeting the
5
City's regional housing needs requirements in a manner that minimizes pressure on regional highway facilities; (4) contributing to the clear identity of the train station area as a comfortable, attractive and vibrant public realm; and (5) providing appropriate protection of sensitive natural resources. “Households in the highest pedestrian friendly areas drive half as much as those in the least pedestrian friendly areas” (Sierra Club [5]). The most commonly cited data indicates the standard walking distance to a rail service is one half mile (MTC [6]). Nearly 60% of all bicycle trips are one mile or less, and 40% of all bicycle trips are two miles or less (2009 NHTS [4]). The City of Fairfield, which is receiving funding for the train station from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), by MTC Resolution 3434 [3] is required to provide 2,200 households within the half mile radius from the train station. The housing numbers outlined in the MTC Station Area Planning Manual [7], state a municipality must provide 3,000-7,500 as a minimum in the corridor. As a component of the recently approved Train Station Specific Plan, the City has approved a Town Center just north of the future train station site, and feels the MTC’s housing requirements fall short in supporting the train station and a vibrant town center. Therefore, the City strongly supports a variety of housing types outside of the half mile radius, but within a short drive of the town center. The proposed mix of land uses, with a predominance of housing types but also with complimentary commercial and retail uses, is intended to support the train station, the city’s new town center and to help alleviate the City's current jobs/housing imbalance, thereby reducing vehicle miles traveled, citywide congestion, and air pollution over the long term. The large conservation area will help fulfill the need to provide long term protection to sensitive resources located within the region.
Project Purpose and Need: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
The Corps has determined that the overall project purpose for the Hawthorne Mill East development is to create a viable, large-scale mixed residential and commercial development within the limits of the City of Fairfield that will service the future new Capitol Corridor Train Station. In order for the City to meet its goal of creating a vibrant transit hub in the vicinity of the planned train station, there is a need for such uses on the lands adjacent to the train station site.
IV. PROJECT BACKGROUND, DESCRIPTION AND IMPACTS
A. Background
The project site has, for a number of years, been designated as an area for potential development of various industrial and commercial uses. Given the lack of demand for such uses in the area, the site has remained vacant and has been used for grazing.
In the early 1990s, rail service began on the Capitol Corridor, a commuter line between Sacramento and the San Jose. By 2006, the service had expanded to 32 weekday trains between Sacramento and Oakland, providing a convenient alternative to driving on increasingly congested freeways. The only stop in Solano County is located in Suisun City. In the mid 1990s, the City of Fairfield began working with the Solano Transportation Authority and other communities in Solano County to develop a plan for additional Capitol Corridor stations in the
6
County. Through these efforts, the Cities of Fairfield and Vacaville agreed to jointly develop a new station at the southeast corner of Peabody Road and Vanden Road in northeast Fairfield. The station is designed to serve commuters in eastern Fairfield and all of Vacaville, which has no land directly on the rail line. Service to the Suisun station would be unaffected by the new Fairfield station. In 1999, Fairfield acquired land for the station, and in June of 2010 the City approved the Fairfield-Vacaville Intermodal Train Station Project. Construction of the Train Station Project is scheduled to commence in early 2013 and be completed by early 2015.
Because the City determined that a more thorough planning effort was needed to ensure that the opportunities created by the new train station are maximized, the City directed staff in 2005 to prepare a Specific Plan for land within approximately one half mile of the station. The City's goal is a planning process that transforms an underutilized ranching and industrial area into a vibrant transit and pedestrian-oriented district. The Project site is located within this underutilized area and is within Fairfield's city limits. Although a significant portion of the Project site lies within the half mile radius of the train station, planning for the site has proceeded independently from the City's Train Station Specific Plan due to the size of the site and the resources located thereon. Further, given that the proposed Project involves an individual Section 404 permit and preparation of an Environmental Impact Study under NEPA, the City believed that incorporating the proposed Project into the Train Station Specific Plan could delay the approval process for the Specific Plan, which is being conducted at a programmatic level and doesn’t require any federal review under NEPA. The proposed Project, however, has been designed to meet the goals of the Specific Plan and to provide a mixture of housing types and complimentary uses within the vicinity of the planned train station.
As part of the planning process for the Project site, the Applicant commissioned numerous studies of the site's biological resources. The site, which is currently grazed grassland, is bisected by McCoy Creek and is located adjacent to McCoy Basin’s westerly boundary. McCoyBasin is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. The biological studies conducted on the site showed that the site's most significant biological resources are concentrated in the area south of McCoy Creek and east of the McCoy Basin. The Project has been designed to preserve and provide perpetual management of the area containing these resources.
The site has been identified as a location for a portion of the Jepson Parkway Project known as the Walters Road extension. The Jepson Parkway Project is sponsored by the Solano Transportation Authority. As proposed, the Waters Road extension would cross the proposed conservation area and occupy 9.6 acres of the site. The Jepson Parkway Project would also involve the widening of Cement Hill Road, which would impact a small portion of the northern edge of the Project site. The Jepson Parkway Project is currently waiting for funding for all portions of the project, and the completion dates are unknown at this time.
B. Location and Setting
The Project site encompasses approximately 367.5 acres, in the northeast portion of the City of Fairfield, within the city limits. The site is located north of Airbase Parkway at or near the southwest corner of Cement Hill Road (on the north) and Peabody Road (on the east). The Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way is to the south, and the McCoy Basin is to the west.
7
The Project site is in Solano County on the Elmira 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle in the northwestern half of Section 16 and northeastern quarter of Section 17, Township 5 north, Range 1 west, at approximate elevation of 40 to 70 feet.
The site is comprised of the following eight Fairfield Assessor’s Parcels: 170-050-110, 170-050-120, 170-150-130, 170-020-120, 170-250-010, 170-250-020, 170-250-030 and 170-250-040.
C. Project Site Characteristics
The topography of the site is gently sloping. Elevations on the property range from approximately 70 feet above sea level at the northeast corner to approximately 37 feet above sea level at the southern end of McCoy Basin, with an average of 45 feet above sea level. The site is bisected by McCoy Creek which flows in a southwest direction, draining into the Strassberger Basin off the property. The habitats on the site are a mosaic of grazed annual grassland, vernal pool, seasonal wetland, alkali meadow, emergent wetland drainage, perennial drainage, open water, seasonal swale and perennial fresh water marsh.
To the southeast of the Project site is the McCoy Basin which is owned by the Bureau of Land Management and managed by the Solano Irrigation District. It encompasses 42 acres. Historical aerial photographs beginning in 1872 show a natural lake in the location of the currently managed McCoy Basin. At this time, prior to development in the watershed, the channel of McCoy Creek did not connect to McCoy Lake, and is mapped as ending in the wetland complex to the east of the basin. A 1937 photograph shows the site as a mosaic of mima mounds, vernal pools and seasonal wetlands. From 1937 to 2008, the photographs show that the site east of McCoy Basin, both north and south of McCoy Creek, were disturbed by agricultural activities. During this period, the mima mound topography was leveled by the construction of irrigation ditches and repeated disking. These activities increased forage production for cattle grazing operations on the site by decreasing the area of vernal pools and seasonal wetlands which are lower in productivity than upland areas. To the west of McCoy Basin, the photographs show the site was regularly used for the production of hay (Appendix C). The Project site is undeveloped and is currently used for grazing cattle. The surrounding area is currently a mixture of newer housing and longstanding agriculture and industrial uses. Existing zoning in the area ranges from medium- and high-density housing to industrial. The uses immediately surrounding the project site include a self-storage business north across Cement Hill Road; a cement batch plant diagonally across Cement Hill/Peabody intersection; industrial and agricultural uses to the east; agricultural zoned for highway/regional commercial to the south and housing and industrial park uses to the west. A PG&E substation is adjacent to the Project site at Peabody and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The City of Fairfield recently approved the Train Station Specific Plan which changed the zoning to the north of the project site across Cement Hill Road to residential, and to the east across Peabody Road and North of Vanden Road to a mixture of housing, Town Center and industrial park. The project site averages approximately 45 feet above sea level. The site is bisected by McCoy Creek which flows in a southwest direction, draining into the Strassberger Basin off the property.
The Project site is currently zoned by the City of Fairfield as IG (General Industrial, near the Union Pacific Railroad right of way); IL/CS (Limited Industrial and Service Commercial with a
8
Resource Conservation Overlay, northwest of the IG); IBP (Business and Industrial Park, southwestern corner) and OSC (Open Space Conservation around McCoy Basin).
D. Proposed Project
The proposed Project would have two main components: (1) a transit oriented mixed-use development and (2) a conservation area. The development area includes approximately 108.9 acres. With the exception of a seven acre area located at the corner of Cement Hill Road and Peabody, the development would occur in the area north of McCoy Creek. The Project has been designed to help accomplish the City's goal of creating a vibrant, populated, mixed use transit hub around the approved train station. To this end, higher density housing and retail and commercial uses are located within the area adjacent to the train station. A mix of single family housing, including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, is provided contiguous to this area, within easy walking and bicycling distance of the train station. The neighborhoods have been designed to promote and encourage walking and biking; to this end, the Project includes numerous pedestrian walkways and bicycle trails which are easily accessible and provide safe street crossing. Direct pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular access to the train station will be provided via the extension of Vanderbilt Drive to the south of the PG&E substation under the future elevated Peabody Road. A community center with a pool would be located at the terminus of the main entrance into the community which will provide a gathering hub for the whole community.
As proposed, 58.2 acres will be devoted to development of approximately 504 residential units,and 6.4 acres will be designated for high density residential, for an additional 275+ units. Mixed use retail and commercial uses are planned on approximately four acres along Cement Hill Road and the corner of Peabody and Cement Hill Roads. The location of the mixed use retail and commercial sites were planned to be in close proximity to the train station. The uses will serve the passengers of the train as well as provide services for the residents of Hawthorne Mill. Both uses are also located on streets that will be directly connected to the train station with the future construction of the new elevated Peabody Road and Cement Hill intersection. Other uses include: parks and open space encompassing 6.4 acres; rights of way encompassing 27.8 acres; storm water and water quality features on 4.7 acres; and a community recreation center with clubhouse and pool on 1.5 acres (see Table 1).
The Project has also been designed to achieve the City's goal of preserving important resources. Approximately 258.6 acres will be preserved and managed as a conservation area. This area includes 61.74 acres of wetlands, 2.29 acres of perennial stream (McCoy Creek), and 1.61 acres of perennial and irrigation ditches. The conservation area also supports a large population of the federally listed Contra Costa goldfields. The project proposes to mitigate for impacts to wetlands, aquatic features, and listed species through the preservation and restoration of seasonal wetlands and vernal pools in the conservation area.
9
Table 1: Land Use Program
Hawthorne Mill East
Land Uses Residential 58.2 Park/Linear Park 6.4 Rights-of-Way 27.8 Storm water Basin and Bioretention
4.7
Mixed Use Retail 2.3 Commercial 1.6 Mixed Use Recreation Center 1.5 High Density 6.4 Total Development Area 108.9Hawthorne Mill and City Habitat Conservation Area
258.6
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA (acres) 367.5
E. Effects on Waters of the United States
There are 100.75 acres of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on the 367.5 acre Project site which includes the Hawthorne Mill Conservation Area. There are 92.45 acres of wetlands including 6.78 acres of vernal pools, 68.13 acres of seasonal wetlands, 15.57 acres of alkali meadow, and 1.97 acres of perennial freshwater marsh. There are 2.33 acres of perennial stream (McCoy Creek), 4.36 acres of open water and 0.6 acres of perennial ditch and 1.01 acres of stormwater/irrigation ditch for a total of 8.30 acres of non-wetland waters. Impacts associated with the development of the property would amount to 37.75 acres of permanent fill in jurisdictional features which would be mitigated through the restoration of on-site and off-site wetland mitigation designed, in part, to function as vernal pools and provide additional potential habitat for federally endangered Contra Costa goldfields.
10
V. ANALYSIS OF OFF-SITE ALTERNATIVES
A. Selection Criteria for Off-Site Alternative Sites
Site selection criteria represent the first level of screening for availability of possible off-site alternatives to the proposed Project site that achieve the project purpose. These criteria are designed to exclude from further evaluation sites which would clearly not be practicable.Selection criteria used for screening potential alternative sites include the following:
Parcel must be located within or near the two mile radius of the train station, and must be able to be connected by pedestrian and bicycle pathways to the train station. One of the fundamental purposes of the project is to create a community which will utilize the new train station for daily commutes instead of individual automobile trips, with a significant portion of residents accessing the train station by walking or biking. Transit planners consider the half mile radius around a transit station or transit hub as being the generally accepted distance that people will walk to access a station (Canepa [1], MTI [2], MTC [3]. Statistics show that nearly 60% of all bicycle trips are one mile or less, and nearly 40% of all bicycle trips are two miles or less (2009 NHTS [4]). Therefore, the two mile radius was selected as the maximum distance that a transit oriented mixed use development project could be located away from the train station and still encourage daily pedestrian and bicycle trips to and from the train station.
Parcels must be at least 120 acres in size. To satisfy the Project Purpose, the site must be large enough to accommodate more than 780 residential units, and a combination of retail, commercial and community features in order to create a vibrant transit oriented hub community. It was determined that a minimum of 120 acres would be necessary to accommodate all the necessary components of the integrated community.
Parcel must be available for development. Under the initial screening criteria, a site is not considered available if it is currently developed or has been approved for alternative development or designated as open space or greenbelt, and located within a military easement for Travis Air Force Base.
B. Screening Criteria for Alternative Sites
Site screening criteria represents the second level of screening for practicability of alternative sites identified in the first level of assessment. The following screening criteria were used to assess potential off-site alternative sites for practicability.
11
1. Project Purpose
Alternative sites must have sufficient acreage to allow for development of the proposed transit oriented community which includes residential, commercial, retail, and community services. To accomplish this purpose, the community must include more than 780 residential units and commercial and retail space. The number of residential units necessary is based on the anticipated needed number of residents in close proximity to the future train station and the town center to support both of these uses and to create a vibrant community. This requires an opportunity for higher density housing, retail and commercial uses within a half mile of the train station. The half mile radius is the accepted distance people will walk to a transit station or hub (Canepa 2007 [1], MTI [2], 2009 NHTS [4], Sierra Club 2007 [5]). Given that a transit oriented community must include a mixture of housing types catering to different sectors of the housing market, the project must allow for single family detached units with a mixture of small and medium sized lots as well as multi-family units. In addition, the alternative site must maximize pedestrian and bicycle connections between the residential, retail and commercial uses and the train station.
Alternative sites must be located within the City of Fairfield’s city limits, able to provide residential development opportunities to fulfill the unmet needs of the City, and be close to other existing residential developments. The project should contribute to regional growth management by locating residential development on an infill site that is contiguous with existing development, thereby reducing long-term development pressure that would otherwise be felt in more environmentally sensitive areas less proximate to existing land uses.
2. Logistics
Site must be within a two mile radius of the Fairfield-Vacaville future train station.
Site must allow for development of an integrated community, which requires creation of continuous community, with roadways and pedestrian and bicycle pathways that connect the various components as well as shared community services that create a single, unified community.
Site must be adjacent to or in a location where utilities and infrastructure are available or can be extended at a reasonable cost. To be deemed practicable, the utilities and infrastructure must be available within the next two years.
The parcels must be relatively flat in topography, and the development areas must be soil balanced, so the necessity of importing soil into the project area or exporting excess soil from the project area is not required. A non-balanced site would result in additional environmental impacts associated with importing or exporting soils as well as significant additional costs.
12
3. Availability
Alternative sites must include available parcels which are not included in a current land use application.
Alternative sites must have a maximum of five owners to be feasible for assembling the parcels for purchase. The maximum number of five owners was selected due to the inherent difficulty in assembling multiple parcels for development. With five owners, the assemblage can be achieved within the two year period cited above in the “logistics” criteria .
4. Environmental
Development of the alternative sites must result in significantly lessenvironmental impacts than the proposed project site. Because there are no sites which pass the other screening criteria, the environmental resources of alternative sites were not analyzed.
5. Cost
Alternative sites must have development costs that are not significantly greater than the proposed project. Because there are no sites which pass the other screening criteria, the cost of alternative sites were not analyzed. It is noted, however, that development of many of the off-site alternatives would require significant extension of utilities. Accordingly, it is anticipated that many of these sites would also be rendered not practicable as a result of cost considerations.
C. Identification of Potential Alternative Sites
To identify potential off-site alternatives, current aerial photographs of the City of Fairfield werereviewed, and all undeveloped parcels of land encompassing a minimum of 120 acres within or adjacent to a 2 mile radius of the project were identified. This led to the identification of 15 sites. Ten of the sites were eliminated from further consideration due to the fact that they were approved for development for different projects, and are, therefore, not available for this project (See Figure 1).
D. Analysis of Potential Off-Site Alternatives
Five sites were identified as being potentially practicable alternatives and were subject to further analysis, as described below. The analyzed sites are shown on Figure 1.
13
1. Alternative Site A (APN: Various)
a. Project Purpose
Alternative Site A includes 503 acres and therefore is of sufficient size to accommodate the Hawthorne Mill East Development. However, the entire site is more than two miles from the proposed future train station and therefore, is not situated in an area that could support a transit oriented development (Figure 1). Additionally, the entire site is located within the County, and the cities of Fairfield and Susuin have stated that they will not annex the area into their cities. Development of this site would not meet the overall project purpose.
b. Logistics
The area is also outside any municipal service area as indicated in Solano County’s General Plan. Any large scale re-development of the area to higher density residential uses would require a private package sanitary system, plus the use of wells for well water. Because Alternative Site A does not have existing sewer or water utilities, it does not meet the logistics criteria.
c. Availability
The approximately 503 acre area is divided into 219 parcels ranging in size from 0.42 acres to 2.50 acres. The area is an unincorporated area comprised of semi-rural ranchettes, and is not included in any municipalities’ sphere of influence.
The enormous effort required to acquire and assemble a sufficient number of the 219 parcels to create a viable project application may well not be possible and, in any event, would be prohibitive, both monetarily and time invested. Therefore, this parcel does not meet the availability criteria.
d. Overall
Given that the site would not allow for development consistent with the overall project purpose and does not meet the availability or logistics screening criteria, the site is not a practicable alternative.
2. Alternative Site B (APN: Various)
a. Project Purpose
Alternative Site B includes approximately 550 acres and therefore is of sufficient size to accommodate the Hawthorne Mill East Development and meet the housing needs of the City of Fairfield. However, the site is not located close enough to the future train station to support transit oriented development (Figure 1). The development of this site would not meet the overall project purpose.
14
b. Logistics
Alternative Site B is in a location where utilities and infrastructure could be extended from adjacent development and is large enough to support the proposed development.
c. Availability
The parcels are outside the sphere of influence of the City of Fairfield, and are located within a military easement for Travis Air Force Base. The military easement provides for future expansion of the base, and restricts the development of the properties for residential purposes. Therefore, this parcel does not meet the availability criteria.
d. Overall
Given that the Alternative Site B would not allow for development consistent with the overall project purpose and it does not meet the availability screening criteria, the site is not a practicable alternative.
3. Alternative Site C (APN: Various)
a. Project Purpose
Alternative Site C is comprised of 36 parcels totaling approximately 259± acres and therefore is of sufficient size to accommodate the proposed development. In addition, Alternative Site C is located in close proximity to the future train station; placing the project in this area would support the development of a transit oriented community. (Figure 1). Accordingly, development of this site would meet the overall project purpose.
b. Logistics
Alternative Site C is in a location where utilities and infrastructure could be extended from adjacent development and is large enough to support the proposed development.
c. Availability
The parcels in Alternative Site C are included within the Train Station Specific Plan which has been approved by the Fairfield City Council. Numerous businesses are located on the parcels; many have been there for years and are still viable. A few of the business have indicated they would be willing to re-locate within the general area of the specific plan. However, no plans are currently included in the specific plan to accommodate the needs of these businesses for relocation. Also, a few of the parcels are currently under contract to other developers for purchase. Because 36 parcels need to be assembled (and not all of them are available for purchase) to accommodate the proposed Project, this Alternative does not meet the availability criteria.
15
d. Overall
Given that the Alternative Site C does not meet the availability criteria, it is not a practicable alternative.
4. Alternative Site D (APN: Various)
a. Project Purpose
Alternative Site D includes approximately 640 acres and therefore is of sufficient size to accommodate the Hawthorne Mill East Development and meet the housing needs of the City of Fairfield. However, the site is not located close enough to the future train station to support transit oriented development (Figure 1). Accordingly, development of this site would not meet the overall project purpose.
b. Logistics
Alternative Site D is in a location where utilities and infrastructure could be extended from adjacent development and is large enough to support the proposed development.
c. Availability
There are four parcels located in this area totaling approximately 640± acres. Except for a small, less than 20 acre portion of the area, the majority of the parcels are located in the Vacaville-Fairfield-Solano County Greenbelt.
In 1994, the cities of Fairfield and Vacaville and Solano County formed the Greenbelt Authority through a Joint Powers Agreement. The Joint Powers Agreement was jointly adopted by the City of Fairfield, the City of Vacaville, and Solano County. The boundaries for the greenbelt set by the Authority are outlined in Figure1. The designation of the area as “greenbelt” prevents urbanized development to occur. Therefore, this parcel area does not meet the availability criteria.
d. Overall
Given that the Alternative Site D does not meet the project purpose and availability screening criteria, it is not a practicable alternative.
16
5. Alternative Site E
a. Project Purpose
Alternative Site E includes approximately 620 acres and therefore is of sufficient size to accommodate the Hawthorne Mill East Development and meet the housing needs of the City of Fairfield. However, the site is not located close enough to the future train station to support transit oriented development (Figure 1). Accordingly, development of this site would not meet the overall project purpose.
b. Logistics
Alternative Site E is at a location where utilities and infrastructure are not present or easily accessible. Therefore, the site does not meet the logistical criteria.
d. Availability
Alternative Site E is within the Travis Reserve which has been set aside for future expansion of Travis Air Force Base. The City of Fairfield’s General Plan Land Use Element designates “Travis Reserve” as it applies to certain unincorporated land located north and east of Travis Air Force Base. Land in the Travis Reserve is set aside for future expansion of Travis Air Force Base only. If the status of the base changes, the construction of a non-military airport and support uses may be permitted in the Travis Reserve. No residential uses are permitted in the Travis Reserve. Until a military or airport use is proposed for land within the Travis Reserve designation, the city supports its continued use for agriculture and grazing.
The Travis Air Force Base Land Use Compatibility Plan, adopted by the Solano County Airport Land Use Commission in June 2002, locates this alternative parcel area within Compatibility Zone C, and Noise Contour of 65-70 dB CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level). The City of Fairfield’s General Plan Health and Safety Element Program HS 9.2 A, prohibits new residential zoning on land where outdoor noise levels are greater than 60 dB CNEL.
In Addition, the voter approved Initiative Measure L resulted in the Fairfield City Council approving Ordinance 2003-10 on May 20, 2003. The Ordinance reaffirmed and readopted the City’s Travis Reserve designation in the General Plan to ensure that urban development does not conflict with future national security missions of the base. The Ordinance further amended the General Plan so that the Travis Reserve designation can only be amended by a vote of the people through December 31, 2020. Therefore, this parcel area does not meet the availability criteria.
17
e. Overall
Given that the Alternative Site E would not allow for development consistent with the overall project purpose and it does not meet the logistical or availability screening criteria, the site is not a practicable alternative.
VI. ANALYSIS OF ON-SITE ALTERNATIVES
Four on-site alternative project designs which could potentially reduce impacts to waters of the United States from that included in the proposed project were identified. Each of these alternatives was analyzed under the criteria defined below to determine if it represented the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative, LEDPA.
A. Screening Criteria for On-Site Alternatives
The following criteria were used to evaluate on-site alternatives.
1. Project Purpose
Alternative designs must have sufficient acreage to allow for development of a large scale, transit oriented mixed use development including residential, commercial, and retail services. To accomplish this purpose, the community must include more than 780 residential units. This number of residential units was determined based on the anticipated needed number of residents in close proximity to the future train station and the town center to adequately support both of these uses and to create a vibrant community. Further, to support the transit oriented community and support the train station, higher density housing and retail and commercial uses must be provided and located adjacent and within a half mile of the train station to facilitate and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic to and from the train station and the project uses.
The alternative design must provide a mixture of housing types including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, and high density multifamily, each created to provide viable, integrated neighborhood communities. A mixture of housing types is necessary to provide options for various sectors of the housing market, both to meet the needs of the City of Fairfield and to support a transit oriented development. The definition of “integrated” as used here means the communities have been designed to blend into a functioning or unified whole. There must be a continuous connectivity, and the neighborhoods must not be physically separated. Additionally, the design must incorporate community uses, such as parks, open space and/or community center which contribute to the creation of a unified community.
The alternative design must have pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes connecting neighborhoods, and pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes to provide connections between the residential, retail and commercial uses and the future train station.
18
The alternative design must facilitate the development of a vibrant transit oriented development and transportation hub by providing an opportunity for creation of commercial and retail services within walking distance of residential uses and regional transportation services, thereby relieve congestion on local and regional roadways.
The alternative design must lessen the job-housing imbalance existing in the City of Fairfield by providing commercial and retail services.
2. Logistics
The alternative must provide adequate and safe access to the future train station by providing access directly to the future train station.
Three points of accesses from the residential and commercial development to Cement Hill Road must be provided, with at least one direct access to the future train station 3
The accesses to Cement Hill Road are important because it is scheduled to become a future regional transportation route to I 80 (Figure 4).
3. Cost
The alternative design must have a cost per net developable acre4 that is not substantially higher than the proposed project.
4. Environmental
The alternative design must have significantly less impacts to aquatic ecosystems than the proposed Project, without having other concomitant significant adverse environmental impacts.
5. Overall
An alternative is not a practicable alternative unless it meets all of the above criteria.
3 Since the EIR was approved for the Train Station Specific Plan, Cement Hill Road has been widened from four lanes to six lanes. The Solano Transportation Authority (STA) has taken away the stoplights for Hawthorne Mill East at two intersections. That means there is only one stoplight at the intersection of Noonan Road and the entrance into the planned retail and commercial center. The future residents of Hawthorne Mill East will need all of the points of access to Cement Hill Road to safely ingress and egress. 4 Cost per net developable acre is calculated by dividing the total of the infrastructure costs and land development costs, by the total number of developable acres for each on-site alternative.
19
B. Analysis of On-site Alternatives
1. Proposed Project
The Proposed Project (Figure 2) was submitted to the City of Fairfield in 2007 as a Tentative Map application. The Proposed Project is a large scale, transit oriented mixed use development which includes residential, commercial, and retail services. It satisfies the current unmet needs of the City of Fairfield by providing 504 single family residential units in close proximity to the future train station, and 275 high density residential units within a half mile of the future train station. A mix of single family housing, including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, is provided contiguous to this area, within easy walking and bicycling distance of the train station. The neighborhoods have been designed to promote and encourage walking and biking; to this end, the Project includes numerous pedestrian walkways and bicycle trails which are easily accessible and provide safe street crossing. Direct pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular access to the train station will be provided via the extension of Vanderbilt Drive to the south of the PG&E substation under the future elevated Peabody Road. A community center with a pool would be located at the terminus of the main entrance into the community which will provide a gathering hub for the whole community.
As proposed, 58.2 acres will be devoted to development of approximately 504 residential units,and 6.4 acres will be designated for high density residential, for an additional 275+ units. Mixed use retail and commercial uses are planned on approximately four acres along Cement Hill Road and the corner of Peabody and Cement Hill Roads. The location of the mixed use retail and commercial sites were planned to be in close proximity to the train station. The uses will serve the passengers of the train as well as provide services for the residents of Hawthorne Mill. Both uses are also located on streets that will be directly connected to the train station with the future construction of the new elevated Peabody Road and Cement Hill intersection. Other uses include: parks and open space encompassing 6.4 acres; rights of way encompassing 27.8 acres; storm water and water quality features on 4.7 acres; and a community recreation center with clubhouse and pool on 1.5 acres.
a. Project Purpose
The Proposed Project provides a mixture of housing types including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, and high density multifamily, each created to provide viable, integrated neighborhood communities.
It provides pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes connecting neighborhoods and commercial and retail uses and, provides direct pedestrian and bicycle connections between the residential, commercial, and retail uses and the future train station.
The Proposed Project facilitates the development of a vibrant transit oriented development and transportation hub, and creates commercial and retail services within walking distance of residential uses and the Fairfield Train Station.
20
The Proposed Project lessens the existing job-housing imbalance in the City of Fairfield by providing commercial and retail services.
The Proposed Project satisfies the overall project purpose.
b. Logistics
The Proposed Project provides adequate and safe access to the future train station by providing direct access to the station from the residential, commercial, and retail uses.
It has three points of access from the residential, commercial and retail development to Cement Hill Road. One direct access to the future train station is also provided.
The Proposed Project meets the logistics criteria.
c. Cost
The Proposed Project has a total development cost of approximately $32,194,900 or $296,000 per developable acre (Appendix A).
d. Environmental
The Proposed Project would impact 37.75 acres of water of the United States including 0.08 acres of non-wetland waters, 5.54 acres of alkali wetlands, 31.56 acres of seasonal wetlands, 0.18 acres of vernal pools and 0.40 acres of perennial freshwater marsh (Appendix B).
e. Overall
The Proposed Project is practicable as it meets the all of the screening criteria.
2. Alternative A (No Fill Alternative)
Alternative A (Figure 3) was designed to test the practicability of avoiding impacts to all of the site’s aquatic resources. Full avoidance of all waters of the U.S. would only allow for the development of only 1.6 acres of commercial uses.
a. Project Purpose
Alternative A is not a large scale, transit oriented mixed use development that satisfies the current unmet needs of the City of Fairfield.
It does not provide a mixture of housing types including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, and high density multifamily, each created to provide viable, integrated neighborhood communities.
21
The commercial site is directly connected to the future train station; however, it would not be integrated with a mixture of residential, commercial and retail uses.
It does not provide residential development opportunities to fulfill the unmet needs of the City.
The alternative does not facilitate the development of a vibrant transit oriented development and transportation hub, thereby relieving congestion on local and regional roadways.
The alternative does not lessen the job-housing imbalance existing in the City of Fairfield.
Alternative A does not meet the project purpose criteria.
b. Logistics
Alternative A does provide an adequate and safe access directly to the future train station, from the 1.6 acre commercial site.
Alternative A provides one point of access to Cement Hill Road for the 1.6 acre commercial site, which is deemed adequate for the limited amount of development provided.
Accordingly, Alternative A meets the logistics criteria.
c. Cost
This Alternative has a total development cost of $4,743,900 or $2,259,000 per developable acre (Appendix A).
This Alternative is considerably higher than the proposed project, and therefore, does not meet the cost criteria.
d. Environmental
Alternative A would not impact any waters of the United States.
Alternative A meets the environmental criteria
e. Overall
Alternative A is not practicable as it does not meet the project purpose.
22
3. Alternative B (High Density and Reduced Aquatic)
Alternative B (Figure 5) was designed to test the practicability of reducing aquatic impacts by eliminating residential units in the western portion of the site and constructing high density units at 29 units per acre in the middle of the site, in place of the single family detached residential units. This alternative would allow for the construction of 504 high density units, constructed as three or four story building over parking. It would also allow for development of commercial and retail uses within a half mile radius of the future train station. The total developed area would be approximately 47 acres.
a. Project Purpose
Alternative B would not allow for the creation of more than 780 residential units and, therefore, would not provide sufficient residential units to support the future train station and town center.
Alternative B would not allow for the construction of a community which involves a mixture of housing types. Creating a development with only high density, multi-family units is fundamentally a different project type than one with a preponderance of single family residential units and integrated high-density units. It is anticipated that the lack of single family units would significantly decrease the number of families and permanent residents residing in the community, and would therefore, decrease the long term viability of the train station and town center.
Alternative B would not allow for the creation of an integrated community. In order to be an integrated community, a development needs to include community facilities that serve as a hub or gathering place. This alternative would include only minimal parks and would not have a community center.
Alternative B provides pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes connecting neighborhoods and commercial and retail uses and, provides direct pedestrian and bicycle connections between the residential, commercial and retail uses and the future train station.
Alternative B allows for the creation of a transit oriented development and transportation hub, and creates commercial and retail services within walking distance of residential uses and regional transportation services.
This alternative provides residential development opportunities that fulfill the unmet needs of the City. The project will contribute to regional growth management by locating residential development on a site that is contiguous with existing development, thereby reducing long-term development pressure that would otherwise be felt in more environmentally sensitive areas less proximate to existing land uses.
23
It lessens the job-housing imbalance existing in the City of Fairfield by providing commercial and retail services.
By only providing high density housing units, this alternative fails to meet the project purpose of providing a mixture of housing types and does not provide a sufficient number of units to support the future train station and related uses.
b. Logistics
Alternative B provides adequate and safe access to the future train station by providing direct access to the station.
Alternative B provides two points of access to Cement Hill Road. Three access points would still be required for safe ingress and egress for this number of units.
Accordingly, because Alternative B would not allow for safe ingress and egress from the development, it does not meet the logistical screening criteria.
c. Cost
The total developable cost for this alternative is $24,225,900 or $515,000 per developable acres, a higher cost than the Proposed Project.
In addition, this alternative, because of the increased cost of constructing the high density units at three to four stories over parking, would add an additional $34 million in construction costs over conventional one and two story construction.
Therefore, this alternative does not meet the cost criteria.
d. Environmental
Alternative B would impact 20.4 acres of water of the United States including 0.03 acres of non-wetland waters, 1.98 acres of alkali wetlands, 17.87 acres of seasonal wetlands, 0.12 acres of vernal pools and 0.40 acres of perennial freshwater marsh thereby reducing the aquatic impacts by 17.35 acres (Appendix B).
Alternative B meets the environmental criteria.
e. Overall
Alternative B meets the environmental criteria, but does not meet the project purpose, logistics or cost criteria. Therefore, Alternative B is not a practicable alternative unless it meets all of the above criteria.
24
4. Alternative C
Alternative C (Figure 6) was presented to the U.S. Army Corps and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) in early 2007. It was designed to maximize the uses in close proximity to the future train station and to avoid impacts to aquatic resources. After meeting with representatives of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the project was revised to relocate all residential units located south of McCoy Creek to the north of McCoy creek, extending the development area further to the west. This change significantly reduced impacts to listed species, avoiding all areas where the listed Contra Costa Goldfields exist
a. Project Purpose
Alternative C is a large scale, transit oriented mixed use development which includes residential, commercial, and retail services. It satisfies the current unmet needs of the City of Fairfield by providing 562 residential units, plus 145 high density residential units within a half mile of the future train station.
Alternative C provides a mixture of housing types including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, and high density multifamily, each created to provide viable, integrated neighborhood communities.
Alternative C provides pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes connecting neighborhoods and commercial and retail uses and, provides direct pedestrian and bicycle connections between the residential, commercial and retail uses and the future train station.
Alternative C facilitates the development of a vibrant transit oriented development and transportation hub, and creates commercial and retail services within walking distance of residential uses and regional transportation services.
Alternative C allows for the creation of an integrated community. It would include shared facilities, such as a community center, public parks, and open space. The neighborhoods would be continuous, thereby creating a single united community.
Alternative C provides residential development opportunities that fulfill the unmet needs of the City. The project will contribute to regional growth management by locating residential development on a site that is contiguous with existing development, thereby reducing long-term development pressure that would otherwise be felt in more environmentally sensitive areas less proximate to existing land uses.
Alternative C lessens the existing job-housing imbalance in the City of Fairfield by providing commercial and retail services.
Alternative C meets the project purpose.
25
b. Logistics
Alternative C provides adequate and safe access to the future train station, by providing direct access to the station.
Alternative C has three points of access to Cement Hill road, and one direct access to the future train station.
Alternative C meets the logistics criteria.
c. Cost
This Alternative C total development costs is $43,311,100. The developable cost per acre is $394,000 (Appendix A).
This alternative is considerably more expensive that the Proposed Project, therefore, it does not meet the cost criteria.
d. Environmental
Alternative C would impact 20.32 acres of water of the United States including 0.36 acres of non-wetland waters, 0.75 acres of alkali wetlands, 18.56 acres of seasonal wetlands, 0.25 acres of vernal pools and 0.40 acres of perennial freshwater marsh thereby reducing the overall aquatic impacts by 17.43 acres. However, Alternative C would impact 6 stands and a total of 679 individuals of the federally endangered Contra Costa goldfields observed in 2005 (Appendix B). It is also anticipated that including development south of McCoy Creek could result in significant indirect impacts to the conservation area which supports a large thriving population of Contra Costa goldfields and vernal pools by changing the hydrology of this area.
Although this alternative lessens the impacts to aquatic resources, the overall environmental impact associated with this alternative would be greater than the proposed project given the impact to the Contra Costa goldfields and vernal pool wetlands.
Therefore, Alternative C does meet the environmental criteria.
e. Overall
Alternative C meets the project purpose and logistics criteria. It does not meet the cost criteria, and, because this alternative would result in significantly greater impacts to the federally endangered Contra Costa goldfield, it does not meet the environmental screening criteria. Alternative C is not a practicable alternative.
26
5. Alternative D (Project with Units Re-located to the Cross Parcel)
This Alternative D (Figure 7) was designed to test the practicability of relocating some of the project’s single family detached residential units from the western boundary of Hawthorne Mill East to the City of Fairfield owned property called the Cross parcel. This alternative would allow for the a total of 528 single-family residential units and 145 high density residential units. Approximately 71 of the residential units would be located on the Cross parcel, and the remainder of the units (457 single-family residential and 145 high density) would be located on the project site. This Alternative would have the same mixture of commercial and retail uses within close proximity of the train station. The total development area would be 112.3 acres.
a. Project Purpose
Alternative D would allow for the development of 693 residential units. Although this number is less than the 780 deemed necessary to support the train station and related uses, for purposes of this analysis, this was considered sufficient to meet this element of the project purpose.
Alternative D provides a mixture of housing types including single family detached, with small and medium sized lots, and high density multifamily.
Alternative D does not allow for the creation of an integrated community because almost 15% of the single family residential units would be located in areas that are physically separated from the rest of the community by 1.4 miles and a major four lane road (the future Walters Road extension). The units located on the Cross Property would also be remote from the train station, the commercial uses, and the retail and thereby not be a part of the transit oriented hub. They would not be directly connected with bike and pedestrian paths to these uses. Further, these units would be physically separated from the shared community facilities, such as the community pool, and therefore, would not be part of the integrated community.
By bisecting the project into two sites, Alternative D would not facilitate the development of a vibrant transit oriented development and transportation hub, and create commercial and retail services within walking distance of residential uses and regional transportation services.
Alternative D provides residential development opportunities that fulfill the unmet needs of the City. The project will, however, not contribute to regional growth management by locating residential development on sites that are contiguous with existing development, thereby reducing long-term development pressure that would otherwise be felt in more environmentally sensitive areas less proximate to existing land uses.
27
Alternative D lessens the existing job-housing imbalance in the City of Fairfield by providing commercial and retail services.
Alternative D does not meet the screening criteria of the project purpose.
b. Logistics
This alternative does not provide adequate and safe access to the future train station for a significant portion of the Hawthorne Mill East residential units. The units located on the Cross property are physically separated by more than 1.4 miles and a major four lane road (the future Walters Road extension),
It provides three points of access from the residential, commercial and retail development to Cement Hill Road. One direct access to the future train station is provided for a portion of the residential units.
Alternative D does not meet the logistics screening criteria.
c. Cost
The total development costs for this Alternative are $38,898,387 or $357,000 per developable acre, and therefore, considerably more expensive than the Proposed Project (Appendix A).
Alternative D does not meet the cost criteria.
d. Environmental
Alternative D would impact 25.18 acres of water of the United States including 0.05 acres of non-wetland waters, 3.96 acres of alkali wetlands, 20.64 acres of seasonal wetlands, 0.13 acres of vernal pools and 0.40 acres of perennial freshwater marsh thereby reducing the aquatic impacts by 12.57 acres (Appendix B).
Alternative D meets the environmental criteria.
e. Overall
Given that Alternative D does not meet the screening criteria of the project purpose, cost and logistics criteria, it is not a practicable alternative.
28
VII. CONCLUSION
As is detailed in this document, potential off-site and on-site alternatives to the proposed project have been thoroughly evaluated. No other site is available that is capable of practicably supporting the proposed Project. Accordingly, the Proposed Project, is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative which satisfies the project applicant’s purpose.
29
References
[1.] Bursting the Bubble, Determining the Transit-Oriented Development’s Walkable Limits,Brian Canepa, 2007.
[2.] Mineta Transportation Institute, How Far, By Which Route and Why? A Spatial Analysis of Pedestrian Preference, Marc Scholssberg, Ph.D. and Asha Weinstein Agrawal, PhD., June 2007.
[3.] Meteropolitan Transportation Commission Resolution 3434 Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Policy for Regional Transit Expansion Projects, July 2005.
[4.] US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 2009 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS.)
[5.] Sierra Club, Community Characteristics Promoting Transit and Walking, John Holtzclaw, Ph.D., March 2007.
[6.] Transportation Research Board (TRB), Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, 2nd
Edition, October 2003.
[7.] Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Station Area Planning Manual, Prepared by ReConnecting America Center For Transit-Oriented Development, October 2007.
Figures
Appendix
Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
6111 BOLLINGER CANYON ROAD, SUITE 150 • SAN RAMON, CALIFORNIA 94583 • (925) 866-0322 • FAX (925) 866-8575 • www.cbandg.com
Alternative
Total Number of Lots
Total Number of Developable Acreages 108.9 2.1 47.0 110.0 108.9
Infrastructure Cost 4,743,900$ 4,743,900$ 4,743,900$ 4,743,900$ 7,473,900$
Land Development Cost 27,451,000$ -$ 19,482,000$ 38,567,200$ 31,424,487$
Total Cost 32,194,900$ 4,743,900$ 24,225,900$ 43,311,100$ 38,898,387$
Cost per Developable Acreage 296,000$ 2,259,000$ 515,000$ 394,000$ 357,000$
October 11, 2012
APPENDIX A
504 Lots(High Density Lots)
ENGINEERS PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATEALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
HAWTHORNE MILLFAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA
504 Lots(Various Sizes)
ALTERNATIVE A
No Fill
0 Lots 504 Lots(Various Sizes)
Job No.: 1448-000
ALTERNATIVE C
Original Land Plan
562 Lots(Various Sizes)
Proposed Project
ALTERNATIVE DProject with Units
Relocated to The Cross Parcel
ALTERNATIVE B (REV)
High Density Reduced Aquatic
P:\1400 - 1499\1448-00\Appendix_A_Cost_Summary.xls Page 1 of 1
Appendix B Hawthorne Mill Development 404(b)1 Alternatives Analysis Jurisdictional Waters and Federal Listed Species Impact Comparision for On-site Alternatives (acres impacted) Proposed
Project Alternative A:
No Fill Alternative B: High Density and Reduced
Aquatic Impact
Alternative C: Original Land
Plan
Alternative D: Tentative Map
LayoutModified with Cross Parcel
Addition
Perennial Open Water Intermittent/Perennial Stream 0.08 0.03 0.36 0.05
Perennial Ditch Stormwater/Irrigation Ditch
Total Non-Wetland Waters 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.36 0.05 Alkali Wetland 5.53 1.98 0.75 3.96
Seasonal Wetland 31.56 17.87 18.56 20.64 Vernal Pool 0.18 0.12 0.25 0.13
Perennial Freshwater Marsh 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40
Total Wetlands 37.67 0.00 20.37 19.96 25.13 Total Jurisdictional Waters 37.75 0.00 20.40 20.32 25.18 Contra Costa Goldfields*
Plants (# of Individuals) 80 NA 80 679 80 Estimated Habitat Area (acres) 0.00121 0.00121 0.01029 0.00121
* Habitat area estimated at 0.66 plants per square foot
