Brentwood City Hall


Our home pageContact UsPrevious Page

Central Park Gazebo

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 17

Meeting Date: September 11, 2001

Subject/Title: Public Hearing for an Amendment to Planned Development (PD) 20 to create development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352 within PD-20.

Submitted by: Community Development Department (Oshinsky/Zilm) 

Approved by: Jon Elam, City Manager



RECOMMENDATION

Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No.____ approving an amendment to Planned Development No. 20 by adding development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352. 

PREVIOUS ACTION

The City Council approved Planned Development No. 20 on January 26, 1993. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment to Planned Development No. 20 Development Standards by adding development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352.

BACKGROUND

The Planning Commission at their July 17, 2001 meeting considered and on a 4 – 0 vote, recommended that the City Council amend the existing Planned Development 20 Development Standards creating development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352. The original PD was created with development standards for the westerly portion of the PD and as a shell PD for the easterly portion of the PD. In 1993 when this PD was created it showed that the proposed project site would be within an area zoned for Single Family and Cluster Residential lots as small as 4,000 sq. ft. As development occurs on the easterly side of the PD each developer would be responsible for creating development standards for their individual developments. This is the first property on the east side to be developed. The applicant is proposing lot sizes of 5,352-sq. ft. or larger and a density of 5.04 units per acre. This is at the low end of the General Plan Density of 5 to 11 units per acre and below the midrange of 8 units per acre. 

Deer Creek Partners, LLC., would like to amend the PD standards to include their property in with the existing PD Standards and use the proposed development standards for their individual project. The proposed standards are as follows:

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 8352

17.470.005

H. Timms/Barr Property:

1. Single Family Residential Lots – 4,500 sq. ft.
a. Minimum lot area: Four Thousand five hundred square feet.

b. Minimum lot width: Forty-five (45) feet, as measured from the front yard setback distance with the exception of Lots 27, 28, and 29 having minimum lot widths of 43, 44, and 44 feet, respectively.

c. Minimum front yard setback: Twenty (20) feet as measured from the back of sidewalk to the face of the garage. Front yard setbacks to any front porch or architectural projection shall be fifteen (15) feet.

d. Minimum side yard setback: Twelve (12) foot aggregate with a five (5) foot minimum, as measured from building foundation with the exception of Lots 27 and 29 having side yard aggregate setbacks of 10.4 and 10 feet, respectively. The street side of corner lots shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet.

e. Minimum rear yard setback: Fifteen (15) foot minimum with an overall average of twenty (20) feet.

f. Maximum building height: Thirty (30) feet.

g. All other Planned Development No. 20 development guidelines shall apply to this Tentative Subdivision Map 8352 Timms/Barr project. 

These proposed development standards are consistent with the development standards that were approved for the original Planned Development No. 20.

FISCAL IMPACT: 

This project will generate revenue through Development and Building Permit fees. 

EXHIBITS:

A. City Council Ordinance No. ____.
B. Amended Planned Development No. 20 development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352.
C. Minutes from the Planning Commission meetings of July 17, 2001.
D. Tentative Map 8352.
E. Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352. 

EXHIBIT “A”

ORDINANCE NO. ____ 

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD TO AMEND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 20 BY ADDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 8352 WITHIN PD-20 LOCATED WEST OF CONCORD AVENUE AND SOUTH OF BALFOUR ROAD.
 

WHEREAS, the applicant has filed for an amendment of the development standards of his property to accommodate the subdivision; and

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2001 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, considered public comments and passed Resolution No. 00-80 which recommended the approval of the amendments of Planned Development No. 20 development standards by adding development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352; and

WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration was prepared for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and was considered as a part of the review and approval process; and

WHEREAS, the Negative Declaration identified potentially significant environmental effects associated with the proposed project which can be feasibly mitigated or avoided and these project measures are included in the project conditions of approval and will reduce the impacts identified to a less than significant level; and

WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was legally advertised in the Ledger-Dispatch on September 28, 2000 and July 17, 2001, and mailed to all property owners of record within 300 feet of the subject property according to City policies and Government Code Section 65091; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brentwood hereby finds, as follows, that the proposed amendment will:

1. Establish clear development standards for the uses permitted under the General Plan and the approved Tentative Subdivision Map No. 8352.

2. Provide standards resulting in development that is consistent and compatible with surrounding uses.

3. Provide for adequate public uses and private open space.

4. Generate a level of traffic that can be accommodated by the public circulation system, existing or planned.






5. Serve the housing needs of the City and the region and will not create a detrimental imbalance between the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Government Code Section 65863.6).

6. That the proposed development will clearly result in a more desirable use of land and a better physical environment than would be possible under any single or combination of zones.

7. That the PD Zone proposed amendment is on property which has suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares; and that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any traffic generated by the development.

8. That the plan for the proposed development presents a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby properties and that adequate landscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility.

9. That the natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected with adequate available public and private open spaces designated on the development plan.

10. That the development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and with the City’s Community Development Plan, including all relevant Elements therefore, and with any applicable Specific Plan adopted by the City.

11. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project and orders the filing of the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk.

12. Pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds that the project is within the scope of the development levels evaluated in the Program EIR prepared for the 1993 City of Brentwood General Plan. The Initial Study has further evaluated potential project specific impacts to the environment. Based upon this evidence and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, this City Council finds that the project will not have any significant environmental impacts that were not studied in the Program EIR. The Mitigated Negative Declaration applies all applicable mitigation measures specified in the Program EIR to the project and imposes additional mitigation measures to supplement and strengthen the Program EIR measures. Therefore, since the mitigation measures are incorporated as conditions of approval of the project, the Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the Program EIR for the 1993 General Plan is adequate for all approvals relating to the project.

13. The City Council further finds that no significant new information within the meaning of the Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 has been presented to the City which would necessitate recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for further public review. The Mitigated Negative 

Declaration has not undergone any reorganization on this account. The City Council has considered all verbal and written comments relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and finds no significant new information has arisen.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Brentwood does hereby ordain as follows:

Section 1. The subject project is hereby zoned as Tentative Subdivision Map 8352 within Planned Development 20 for single family residential units.

Section 2. Chapter 17.470 has hereby been amended for the purpose of regulating certain real property and establishing development standards for Tentative Subdivision Map 8352 for single family residential units.

Section 3. Chapter 17.470 is hereby known as Planned Development 20 (PD-20).

Section 4. Amendment to Chapter 17.470.005 is hereby added to read as shown in Exhibit “B” attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance.

Section 5. 

A. This Ordinance shall be published in accordance with applicable law, by one or more of the following methods:

1. Posting the entire Ordinance in at least three (3) public places in the City of Brentwood, within fifteen (15) days after its passage and adoption; or

2. Publishing the entire Ordinance at least once in the Ledger-Dispatch, a newspaper of general circulation published in the County of Contra Costa and circulated in the City of Brentwood, within fifteen (15) days after its passage and adoption; or

3. Publishing in the Ledger-Dispatch a summary of the Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney and posting a certified copy of the Ordinance in the Office of the City Clerk at least five (5) days prior to passage and adoption and along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance.

B. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its passage and adoption.

Section 6. In accordance with Government Code Section 65863.5, upon the effective date of this Ordinance, a copy shall be delivered to the County Assessor.






THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced with the first reading waived at a regular meeting of the Brentwood City Council on the 11th day of September, 2001, and adopted at a regular meeting of Brentwood City Council on the ___________, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:


_____________________________ 
Michael A. McPoland, Sr., Mayor




ATTEST:


_____________________________
Karen Diaz, City Clerk





AMENDED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION


I. BACKGROUND

The Deer Creek Subdivision application was submitted to the City of Brentwood in November 21, 2000. The application included a request for a Planned Development Amendment to establish the development standards for PD-20 and a Tentative Map to subdivide the property into 65 single family lots. A Negative Declaration was prepared for the Deer Creek Subdivision and circulated for public review from November 1, 2000 to November 21, 2000. The City of Brentwood Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed project on November 21, 2000, and recommended modifications to the applicant that reduced the number of single family lots from 65 to 60 units. This recommendation was made in order to make the subdivision more consistent with the intent of the City of Brentwood General Plan and PD-20 for the Brentwood Hills Country Club project area. In compliance with the Planning Commission’s request, the applicant has submitted a revised application consisting of the development of 60 single family homes. The basic circulation and layout of the subdivision has not been modified. The amended project results in the creation of slightly larger lots throughout the subdivision.

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The revised application requires a modification in the project description to reduce the number of single family lots from 65 to 60. The background section in the Initial Study (page 1) identifying the necessary entitlements is hereby amended as follows:

8. Project Description Summary:

The proposed project consists of the following requested entitlements:

Tentative Map to subdivide 11.9 acres into 65 60 single family lots.
PD Amendment to establish the development guidelines for the Deer Creek subdivision.

The project description identified in the Initial Study (page 4) is hereby amended as follows:

VII. The proposed project site consists of 11.9 acres, bordered by the future John Muir Parkway to the east, Ventura Drive to the south, and a future school site and a future park site to the west (See Figure 1). The site is irregularly shaped and is identified by the Contra Costa County Assessor as APN 010-010-011 and 010-010-014. The site is designated Residential Medium Density (5.1 to 11.0 dwelling unit per acre) in the City of Brentwood General Plan. The site is zoned PD-20. The PD-20 land use plan designates the site for Cluster Residential development at a density of 16 du/ac. The applicant is proposing to develop at a density of 5.4 du/ac which is consistent with the General Plan and allowed in the PD-20 development guidelines.

Approval of the proposed subdivision and PD Amendment would result in the creation of 65 60 single family lots for the future development of 65 60 single family homes ranging in size from 1,600 to 3,000 square feet.

III. CEQA CONSIDERATIONS

The revised project reduces the number of single family lots from 65 to 60. The reduction in the number of lots would not affect the property area to be developed by the proposed project. The analysis in the Initial Study regarding impacts such as aesthetics, agriculture, biological resources, and geology, would not require modification. The impacts remain less-than-significant with the implementation of the mitigation measures. The transportation impacts associated with the proposed project would be lessened due to the reduction in the number of single family homes and the associated reduction in the number of trips. In addition, air quality, noise, and public service impacts would also be reduced, and would remain less-than-significant with the implementation of the mitigation measures. 

CEQA Section 15164 discusses addendums to an EIR or negative declaration. An addendum is prepared after the negative declaration has been adopted, and only if minor technical changes or additions are necessary. An addendum need not be circulated for public review, but can be included in or attached to the adopted negative declaration. A decision-making body must consider the addendum with the adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. This Section refers to a negative declaration which has been adopted. CEQA does not specifically address an amendment to a negative declaration prior to adoption, but after public circulation. 

This document is intended to serve as an attachment to the existing Negative Declaration supporting the conclusions reached in the Initial Study regarding project impacts and required mitigation measures. The attached Initial Study, in combination with this amendment, will be considered by the decision-makers in the public hearing process on the proposed project. The Negative Declaration has not been substantially revised; therefore, the document will not be recirculated.

CEQA Section 15073.5 identifies that recirculation is required when the document is substantially revised after public notice of its availability has previously been given, but prior to its adoption. Recirculation is not required when “new information is added to the negative declaration which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the negative declaration.”

The proposed amendments to the Negative Declaration amend the project description to reduce the number of single family homes from 65 to 60. The impacts associated with the proposed project were analyzed based upon 65 single family homes. A five-unit reduction in the development of the subdivision would not result in any new significant impacts or the need for any new mitigation measures. The amended project would remain consistent with the City of Brentwood General Plan and the Brentwood Hills Country Club Specific Plan.

The impacts and mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study would apply to the proposed amended Deer Creek subdivision consisting of the development of 60 single family homes. The amendment to the Negative Declaration clarifies the project description and makes insignificant modifications. Therefore, recirculation of the Negative Declaration is not required pursuant to CEQA Section 15073.5(c)(4).



I. BACKGROUND

1. Project Title: Deer Creek
PD-20 Amendment and Tentative Subdivision Map #8352

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Brentwood
Community Development Department
104 Oak Street
Brentwood, CA 94513

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jeff Zilm
925.516.5405

4. Project Location: South of Balfour Ave., West of the future John Muir Parkway
City of Brentwood
Contra Costa County

5. Project Sponsor=s Name and Address: Thomas S. Cogburn
Deer Creek Partners, LLC
1910 Olympic Blvd., Suite 100
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
925.945.1700

6. General Plan Designation: Residential Medium Density (M)

7. Zoning: PD-20

8. Project Description Summary:

The proposed project consists of the following requested entitlements:

Tentative Map to subdivide 11.9 acres into 65 single family lots. 
PD Amendment to establish the development guidelines for the Deer Creek subdivision.








II. SOURCES

The following documents are referenced information sources utilized by this analysis:


1. City of Brentwood General Plan 1993-2010;
2. City of Brentwood Code Chapter 17,470 PD-20 (Planned Development 20) Zone and PD-20, as amended;
3. Final Environmental Impact Report, Brentwood Hills Country Club, May 1992;
4. Draft Environmental Impact Report, A.G. Spanos Brentwood Hills Country Club, February 1992;
5. Additional Historical Research on the Brentwood Coal Mine Site and the Spanos Property for the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project, February 1992;
6. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Deer Creek Subdivision, July 1999, Anton Geological; and
7. Updated Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Deer Creek Subdivision, August 2000, Anton Geological.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a APotentially Significant Impact@ as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

V Aesthetics G Agriculture V Air Quality
V Biological Resources V Cultural Resources V Geology/Soils
G Hazards & Hazardous Materials V Hydrology/Water Quality G Land Use & Planning
G Energy & Mineral Resources V Noise G Population & Housing
V Public Services V Recreation V Transportation & Circulation
V Utilities/Service Systems G Mandatory Findings of Significance

IV. DETERMINATION

On the basis of this initial study:

G I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

W I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

G I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.


G I find that the proposed project MAY have a Apotentially significant impact@ or Apotentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

G I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.




Signature Date


Printed Name For


V. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION

This Initial Study provides an environmental analysis pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed Deer Creek Subdivision 8352 (proposed project). The environmental analysis for the proposed project is tiered from the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which included program level, project-specific, and cumulative impacts for the project area.

The Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR was a program EIR, prepared pursuant to Section 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.). The Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR analyzed full implementation of the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project and identified measures to mitigate the significant adverse project and cumulative impacts associated with that project.

The CEQA concept of "tiering" refers to the coverage of general environmental matters in broad program-level EIRs, with subsequent focussed environmental documents for individual projects that implement the program. The project environmental document incorporates by reference the discussions in the Program EIR and concentrates on project-specific issues. CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines encourage the use of tiered environmental documents to reduce delays and excessive paperwork in the environmental review process. This is accomplished in tiered documents by eliminating repetitive analyses of issues that were adequately addressed in the Program EIR and by incorporating those analyses by reference.


Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Sections 15152 and 15168(c), this environmental analysis of the Proposed Project is tiered from the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR (State Clearinghouse # 91013066), which is hereby incorporated by reference.

The tiering of the environmental analysis for the proposed project allows this Tiered Initial Study to rely on the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR for the following:

(a) a discussion of general background and setting information for environmental topic areas;

(b) overall growth-related issues;

(c) issues that were evaluated in sufficient detail in the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR for which there is no significant new information or change in circumstances that would require further analysis; and

(d) long-term cumulative impacts.

Thus, this Tiered Initial Study should be viewed in conjunction with the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR. The purpose of this Tiered Initial Study is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the project with respect to the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR to determine what level of additional environmental review, if any, is appropriate. 

Mitigation measures identified in the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR that apply to the proposed project will be required to be implemented as part of the project. Project-specific mitigation measures for new potentially significant impacts that were not previously identified in the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR will also be required to be implemented as part of the proposed project.

VI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project site consists of 11.9 acres, bordered by the future John Muir Parkway to the east, Ventura Drive to the south, and a future school site and a future park site to the west. The site is irregularly shaped and is identified by the Contra Costa County Assessor as APN 010-010-011 and 010-010-014. The site is designated Residential Medium Density (5.1 to 11.0 dwelling unit per acre) in the City of Brentwood General Plan. The site is zoned PD-20. The PD-20 land use plan designates the site for Cluster Residential development at a density of 16 du/ac. The applicant is proposing to develop at a density of 5.4 du/ac which is consistent with the General Plan and allowed in the PD-20 development guidelines.

Approval of the proposed subdivision and PD amendment would result in the creation of 65 single family lots for the future development of 65 single family homes ranging in size from 1,600 to 3000 square feet.

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST


Introduction

The following Checklist contains the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The checklist form is used to describe the impacts of the proposed project. A discussion follows each environmental issue identified in the checklist. Included in each discussion are project-specific mitigation measures recommended as appropriate as part of the Proposed Project.

For this checklist, the following designations are used:

Potentially Significant Impact: An impact that could be significant, and for which no mitigation has been identified. If any potentially significant impacts are identified, an EIR must be prepared.

Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires mitigation to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

Less-Than-Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant under CEQA relative to existing standards.

No Impact: The project would not have any impact.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS.Would the project: 
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? G G W G
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? G G W G
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? G G W G
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? G W G G

Discussion


a,b. The proposed project is not within an area designated as a scenic vista nor does it include any significant scenic resources. Although the project site is relatively flat, Brentwood is surrounded by the coastal range, including views of Mount Diablo. The City of Brentwood has recognized views of Mount Diablo as an important visual resource. Because the proposed development would be located in a flat area of Brentwood and includes single and two story houses, the view of Mount Diablo would not be blocked. Therefore, the impact is less-than-significant.

c. The development of the project site would change the existing visual setting from vacant land to residential uses. The proposed development is considered compatible with other residential uses found throughout the City of Brentwood. The proposed change in use for the project site from vacant to single family homes is consistent with the City of Brentwood General Plan and is compatible with the pattern of development occurring in the general area of the project site. In addition, the development of the single family homes requires Planning Commission Design Review which will ensure compatibility of the development with the surrounding area. The impact is less-than-significant.

As vacant property, very little light or glare is emitted from the project site. The change from a vacant property to a residential subdivision which generates new sources of light and glare would be considered a potentially significant impact. 

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure will mitigate potential impacts related to light and glare to a less-than-significant level.

I-1. In conjunction with development of the proposed project, the Applicant/Developer shall shield all on-site lighting so that it is directed within the project site and does not illuminate adjacent properties or public rights-of-way. A Street Lighting Plan shall be approved by the Engineering Department in conjunction with approval of improvement plans. The shielded light fixtures shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES.In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1977) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? G G W G
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? G G W G
c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland to non-agricultural use? G G W G

Discussion

a-c. The City of Brentwood General Plan includes agricultural preservation policies in the Conservation/Open Space Element which describe potential agricultural preservation program components. The General Plan also designates areas along the eastern and southeastern portions of the Planning Area as Agriculture Conservation. The proposed development is not located within the conservation area. The site has not been actively farmed for nearly 30 years and is not under Williamson Act contract. Also, The Brentwood Hills Country Club Project Plan has identified this area for residential development. There is a walnut orchard which is currently in production located immediately adjacent to the north of the project site. The orchard property is also designated by the Brentwood General Plan for residential development. Therefore, the impact on existing agricultural uses and the loss of farmland would be considered less-than-significant.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
III. AIR QUALITY.Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: 
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? G G W G
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? G G W G
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? G G W G
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? G W G G
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? G G G W

Discussion

a-c. The City of Brentwood is part of the San Francisco Bay Area airshed, which is dominated by the strength and position of a semi-permanent, high-pressure center over the Pacific Ocean near Hawaii. The area is exposed to winds from both the east and west, and the terrain provides little protection from the wind. Air quality within the region is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The air quality impacts associated with the emissions from the increased number of vehicles were analyzed in the Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR. The EIR considered development in the area, including the project site. The project is consistent with the level of buildout in the Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR. The EIR determined that the cumulative development scenarios would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. The findings and overrides adopted as part of the Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR apply to this project. In addition, the project consists of 65 residential units on 12 acres of the entire 720-acre Brentwood Hills Country Club plan area. The size and nature of the development of the proposed project does not result in a significant impact on air quality. Therefore, the air quality impact is considered less-than-significant.

d. Construction-related air quality impacts would occur with the development of the proposed project and related infrastructure improvements. Clearing and earth-moving activities would comprise the major source of construction dust emissions. This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the construction-related impact to a less-than-significant level.


III-2. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant/Developer shall prepare an Erosion Prevention and Dust Control Plan. The plan shall be followed by the project=s grading contractor and submitted to the Public Services Department, which will be responsible for field verification of the plan during construction. The plan shall comply with the City=s grading ordinance and shall include the following control measures and other measures deemed by the Public Services Department to be necessary for the proposed project:

a. A graveled track at project entryways to remove mud and dirt from vehicles leaving the site shall be provided.
b. Water (or an acceptable soil binder chemical) shall be applied to all disturbed earth surfaces (including earth roads and soil stockpiles). Surface material shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur twice per day with complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and at the completion of work for the day.
c. Permanent soil stabilization measures shall be implemented throughout each phase of construction prior to commencement of grading on successive phases.
d. All clearing, grading, earthmoving, and excavation shall stop during periods of high winds greater than 20 mph over one hour.
e. All material transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent escape of dust and debris.
f. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph.
g. During rough grading and construction, adjacent public and private roads shall be swept once per day, or as required by the City, to remove silt and construction debris.
h. Unnecessary idling of construction equipment shall be avoided.
i. Equipment engines shall be maintained in proper working condition per manufacturers= specifications.
j. During periods of heavier air pollution (May to October), the construction period shall be lengthened to minimize the amount of equipment operating at one time.

e. The project would not include industrial or intensive agricultural use; therefore, the project would not create odors or toxic air contaminants. Therefore, no impact would occur. 

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.Would the project: 
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? G W G G
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? G W G G
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? G W G G
D Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? G G G W
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? G G W G
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? G G G W

Discussion

a-c. The Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR identified biological resources within the plan area (see Figure F-1 in the Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR). The Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR included mitigation measures which required biological surveys on all properties to be developed within the Brentwood General Plan area and as part of the General Plan Update. However, the Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR did not identify any of the resources on the project site. The Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR also identified a cumulative loss of habitat as a significant and unavoidable impact. The findings of fact and overriding considerations adopted for the EIR apply to the proposed project site. Sensitive species may have inhabited the project site since the time of certification of the EIR. The impact on biological resources is, therefore, potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure

Implementation of the following mitigation measure will ensure that the impact on biological resources remains less-than-significant.

IV-3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant/developer shall conduct a pre-construction survey to confirm the lack of any biological resources on the site. Should any resources be discovered, appropriate protective mitigation measures shall be incorporated to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Mitigation measures could include avoidance, relocation, or modification to the construction schedule.

d. The project site does not support a wildlife corridor and does not contain any water courses that would support migratory fish. Therefore, the development of the project site would result in no impact.

e. Some trees exist on the site surrounding the existing single family residence. However, these trees are not significant in size or species. Furthermore, the development of the project site is not guided by any specific ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, the impact is less-than-significant.

The City of Brentwood General Plan has several areas which are designated as areas of expected significant natural open space and an expected Habitat Conservation Plan. The project site is not located within any of these areas. Therefore, no impact would occur. 

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES.Would the project: 
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? G W G G
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? G W G G
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource on site or unique geologic features? G G G W
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. G G G W

Discussion


a-b The Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR identified historical resources within the plan area. There were none, however, identified on the project site. Similarly, archaeological resources have not been identified for the project site. However, during construction and excavation activities, unidentified historical and/or cultural resources may be uncovered. This impact would be considered potentially significant. 

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the construction-related impact to a less-than-significant level.

V-4. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant/Developer shall submit plans to the Community Development Department for review and approval which indicate (via notation on the improvement plans) that if historic and/or cultural resources are encountered during site grading or other site work, all such work shall be halted immediately within the area of discovery and the Applicant/Developer shall immediately notify the Community Development Department of the discovery. In such case, the Applicant/Developer shall be required, at his expense, to retain the services of a qualified archaeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, or curating the discovery as appropriate. The archaeologist shall be required to submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a report of the findings and method of curation or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery will be allowed until the proceeding work has occurred.

c. The project is not known to contain any unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features. Therefore, the construction of the proposed project would result in no impact to these resources and features.

d. The project site has not been identified as a burial location for human remains; therefore, the construction of the proposed project would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries and no impact would occur.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.Would the project: 
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? G W G G
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? G W G G
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? G W G G
iv. Landslides? G W G G
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? G W G G
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? G W G G
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1B of the Uniform Building Code? G W G G
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? G G G W

Discussion

a,c. An Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the site by Anton Geological. The report discusses seismicity for the area, and includes the following text: 

AThe nearest mapped fault is the northerly-trending Sherman Island Fault which runs parallel and beneath the approximate location of Concord Avenue (about 500 feet to the east). Under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972, the State Geologist is required to delineate >Earthquake Fault Zones= along known active faults in California. Cities and Counties affected by the zones must regulate certain new development within the zones until geologic investigations demonstrate that the sites are not threatened by surface displacement from future faulting. Information published by the State of California indicates that the Sherman Island Fault is not identified as active and that the subject site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest such zone is associated with the northwesterly-trending and active Marsh Creek Fault and is located about six miles southwesterly of the property at its closest point. In addition to the Marsh Creek Fault, the subject property also may be affected by movement along other, more distant fault systems within northern California.@

The potential damage from the activity will be minimal due the project site location and the project proponent abiding with city and state building standards. However, the proposed project site may be subject to some seismic activity due to its location in the San Francisco Bay Area. The impact is, therefore, potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures

Implementation of the following mitigation measures which were identified in the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project Plan EIR would ensure the impacts are less-than-significant.

VI-5 A detailed soils exploration complete with test borings shall be conducted on the project site in conjunction with the preparation of final grading plans for each phase of construction. The report shall study slope stability as compared to final grading plans. It shall also provide appropriate recommendations for proposed earthwork and provide specific foundation design criteria.

VI-6 Site grading shall be oriented toward maximizing slope stability. Potential slides that may affect the proposed development may be stabilized using cut material from the tops of ridges, if so desired. Suitable techniques include buttressing the existing area or removing the unstable mass and reconstructing the slope with engineered fill, keyways, and subdrains.

b. The proposed project does not result in any greater exposure of soil to potential erosion or loss of top soil. Soil is currently exposed on the project site, and past agricultural and weed abatement practices resulted in an increased soil loss. The development of new residential uses would cover much of the soil, thereby reducing the potential loss of soil. 

However, the proposed project also contemplates grade cutting the southern portion of the proposed project site. This will involve some grading of the proposed project area. The Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR identified this as a potentially significant impact to soil erosion.

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure which were identified in the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project Plan EIR would ensure the impact is less-than-significant.

VI-7 Graded slopes shall be hydroseeded and landscaped prior to October 15 (or the date deemed appropriate by the City after October 15) of the year following rough grading. All slopes on-site shall be maintained in a vegetated state subsequent to project completion.

d. The Environmental Site Assessment identifies the soils on the site as mostly Capay clay. Some of the northwest portion of the project has Rincon clay loam. Both Capay and Rincon soils have slow permeability and high shrink-swell potential. The impacts associated with expansive soils would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the construction-related impact to a less-than-significant level.


VI-8. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a final geologic and geotechnical report shall be conducted for the project site along with any recommendations and remediations necessary to ensure proper grading and construction design of public improvements, building foundations, retaining walls, and drainage.

VI-9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Comprehensive Grading Plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer which reflects the recommendations of the final Geotechnical Study. All recommendations of the final Geotechnical Study and City Engineer shall be incorporated into the grading plan as a condition of the project grading permit and verified in the field by the City Engineer or his representative.

e. The project has been designed to connect to existing sewer systems. Therefore, no impact would occur related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.Would the project: 
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? G G W G
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? G G W G
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? G G G W
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? G G G W
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? G G G W
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? G G G W
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? G G G W
h. Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? G G G W

Discussion

a-b. The transport and routine use of hazardous materials is not typically associated with single family development. The Phase I Environmental Assessment has identified that no tanks or hazardous materials storage facilities are or have been located on the project site. The Environmental Assessment also indicates that the potential for pesticide residue on the site is minimal given the length of time which has passed since the site was actively farmed. Therefore, the impact is considered less-than-significant.

c. A proposed school is anticipated to be constructed to the west of the proposed project site. However, the site is not anticipated to handle hazardous material. Therefore, no impact would occur.

d. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, the site is not listed as a hazardous materials site. Therefore, no impact would occur.

e-f. The project site is not within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport. Therefore, no impact would occur.

g. Development of the project site would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, no impact would occur.

h. The site is not located within an area where wildland fires occur. Therefore, no impact would occur.


Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.Would the project: 
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? G W G G
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? G W G G
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? G W G G
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? G W G G
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? G W G G
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? G W G G
g. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? G G G W
h. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? G G G W
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. G G G W
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? G G G W

Discussion


a,f. Short-term grading and construction activities may cause an increase in erosion leading to sedimentation of streams in the affected watershed. Stormwater pollution control is the responsibility of the State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Board. Stormwater pollution control is implemented through the use of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. The increase in erosion and the effect on water quality is considered a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

VIII-10. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant/Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for review and approval a Drainage Master Plan and measures to control quality of stormwater runoff.

VIII-11. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction permit shall be obtained for any disturbance of more than five acres.

b-e. The project consists of the development of single family homes in an area designated for single family development. Along the southern border of the proposed project site is an existing irrigation channel. The irrigation channel is being relocated and undergrounded concurrent with the development of the adjacent subdivision. The portion located on the project site will be removed during construction. The development will not alter existing drainage courses and will be accommodated in the existing City of Brentwood storm drainage system. Implementation of the proposed project would add impervious surfaces to the area which would result in a decrease in absorption rates and an increase in stormwater runoff rates. The Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR considered this to be a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures which were identified in the Brentwood Hills Country Club Project Plan EIR would ensure the impact is less-than-significant.

VIII-12. Building pads and roadways shall be designed to drain towards the storm drain systems located in the streets.

VIII-13. Culverts shall be sized to accept the runoff incident from upstream properties in the Dry Creek basin and the release from the existing flood control facility upstream on the Deer Creek channel, taking into account planned development upstream.

VIII-14. On-site detention for the Concord Avenue area and/or other drainage improvements shall be provided as determined necessary by the Flood Control District and/or City to insure that the design capacities of the regional drainage improvements are not exceeded.


VIII-15. No buildings, roadways, or other structures which might interfere with the flood control function of the existing detention basins, as determined by the City and the Flood Control District, shall be located in the flood control easement or basin.

VIII-16. All grading within the flood plain of the Dry Creek basin shall not decrease the capacity of the reservoir.

g-i. The project site is not within a 100-year floodplain; therefore, no impact would occur with regards to housing or structures placed in a 100-year flood plain.

The project site is not located in an area that would be affected by a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow; therefore, no impact would occur.






Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING.Would the project: 
a. Physically divide an established community? G G G W
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating on environmental effect? G G W G
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? G G G W

Discussion

a. The proposed project would not physically divide an established community because there are no established residential areas located within the project site. The site is adjacent to a producing walnut orchard located to the north. Although the property is currently in agricultural production, the property is designated in the General Plan for residential development. Therefore, no impact would result on the physical arrangement of the community.

b. The proposed project is consistent with the City of Brentwood General Plan land use designation and is not in conflict with a policy to preserve the environment. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the PD-20 in order to establish design guidelines specific to the subdivision. The type and density of the residential development is consistent with the PD-20 zoning district. The impact is less-than-significant.


c. The project site is not located within the area designated by the General Plan as Expected Habitat Conservation Plan or Area of Significant Natural Open Space. Therefore, no impact would occur. 

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES.Would the project: 
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? G G G W
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? G G G W

Discussion

a,b The project site has not been identified in the City of Brentwood General Plan as containing mineral resources that would be considered a significant resource. Therefore, no impact would occur.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XI. NOISE.Would the project result in: 
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? G W G 
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? G W G G
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? G W G G
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? G W G G
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? G G G W
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? G G G W

Discussion

a-c. The Brentwood Hills Country Club EIR indicates that the proposed project is located outside of the noise contours of the future Delta Expressway and Balfour Road. The project is located immediately adjacent to the future John Muir Parkway which will be constructed as a two lane roadway within a 96-foot right-of-way. The travel lanes are approximately 20 feet from the limits of the right-of-way which will coincide with the rear yard fences of the future residences on the project site. The noise from this roadway could exceed the City of Brentwood General Plan standards of 60 dBA for residential uses. Therefore, the impact is considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would ensure the noise impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

X-17. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director that the General Plan noise standard of 60 dBA for residential uses is not exceeded. Measures necessary to meet this standard could include a fence or wall, an earthen berm in conjunction with a fence or wall, and residential construction methods such as high STC ratings on the windows.

d. There will be temporary increases in the noise levels for the residents adjacent to the property during construction. The Brentwood Hills Country Club Project EIR identified this increase in noise levels as a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the construction-related impacts to a less-than-significant level.


XI-18. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays. These criteria shall be included in the grading plan submitted by the Applicant/Developer for review and approval of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of grading permits.

XI-19. All construction equipment shall use properly operating mufflers, and no combustion equipment such as pumps or generators shall be allowed to operate within 500 feet of any occupied residence during construction hours, unless the equipment is surrounded by a noise protection barrier. These criteria shall be included in the grading plan submitted by the Applicant/Developer for review and approval of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of grading permits.

e,f. The project site is not located near an existing airport and is not within area covered by an existing airport land use plan. Therefore, no impact would occur.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING.Would the project: 
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? G G W G
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? G G W G
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? G G W G

Discussion

a. The density of development is consistent with the City of Brentwood General Plan and zoning designations. Although the development would increase the population in the area, the development of the proposed project would be within the population levels projected under the General Plan. Therefore, the impact is less-than-significant.

b,c One occupied house is on the proposed project site, which will be demolished. Additionally, a pool, a septic tank, a well, and a barn will be removed. Otherwise, the project site is vacant and does not include any other residential structures. Therefore, the construction of the project would not displace existing housing requiring the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The impact is less-than-significant.


Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES.Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: 
a. Fire protection? G W G G
b. Police protection? G W G G
c. Schools? G W G G
d. Parks? G W G G

Discussion

a,b. The proposed project is located within the jurisdiction of the Brentwood Police Department and the East Diablo Fire Protection District. Implementation of the proposed project would add to the overall demand for police and fire protection services. This increase is considered a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

XIII-20. The Applicant/Developer shall participate in a Capital Improvement Financing Program and shall pay sufficient funds to ensure the proposed project will not create excess demand for police services.

XIII-21. The Police Department shall be included in the design review process for this project in order to ensure that the site plan incorporates appropriate crime prevention features.

XIII-22. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and the adopted polies of the East Diablo Fire Protection District (EDFPD).


XIII-23. The Applicant/Developer shall provide an adequate and reliable water supply for fire protection with a minimum fire flow of 2,000 gallons per minute (GPM). The required fire flow shall be delivered from not more than two fire hydrants flowing simultaneously while maintaining 20 pounds of residual pressure in the main.

XIII-24. The Applicant/Developer shall provide the number and type of hydrants called for by EDFPD. Hydrant locations will be determined by the EDFPD prior to issuance of encroachment and/or building permits.

XIII-25. The Applicant/Developer shall provide access roadways having all-weather driving surfaces of not less than 40', unobstructed width, and not less than 13'6" of vertical clearance, to within 150 feet of travel distance to all portions of the exterior walls of every building. Access roads shall not exceed 16% grade, shall have a minimum outside turning radius of 42 feet, and must be capable of supporting imposed loads of fire apparatus (31 tons).

XIII-26. Prior to issuance of encroachment and/or building permits for improvements, the Applicant/Developer (and all subsequent property owners/homeowners) shall submit plans and specifications to the East Diablo Fire Protection District and the City Engineer for review and approval in accordance with codes, regulations, and ordinances administered by the East Diablo Fire Protection District and the State Fire Marshal=s office.

c. The project is located within the Liberty Union High School District and the Brentwood Union Elementary School District. The increase development of single-family residential units will add to the demand for services provided by both Districts. Many of the elementary schools in the district are at or nearing capacity and are only staying under capacity by use of portable classrooms. Implementation of the proposed project would result in a potentially significant impact related to schools.

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

XIII-27. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant/Developer shall submit to the Community Development Director written proof from the Liberty Union High School District and the Brentwood Unified School District indicating that appropriate school mitigation fees have been paid.

d. The City of Brentwood General Plan encourages an urban form that is based on open space throughout and around the community. The General Plan policy recommends park acreage be 5 acres per 1000 residents. Development of the project site will result in new residences and consequently will increase the demand for neighborhood, community, and regional parks and other recreations facilities. The impact on parks would be considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure

Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

XIII-28. Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the Applicant/Developer shall be required to pay the appropriate Quimby Act fees and/or dedicate the necessary park and trail acreage. This requirement shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.







Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XIV. RECREATION.Would the project: 
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? G W G G
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? G G G W

Discussion

a. Recreational facilities are not proposed as part of the development which results in the residents of the subdivision using existing facilities. Development of the project site will result in new residents and consequently will increase demand existing neighborhood, community, and regional parks and other recreations facilities. The impact on parks would be considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

XIV-29. Implement Mitigation Measure XIII-28.

b. The proposed project does not include recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur.


Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XV. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.Would the project: 
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? G W G G
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? G G W G
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? G G G W
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? G G G W
e. Result in inadequate emergency access? G G G W
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? G G G W
g. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? G G G W

Discussion

a. The City of Brentwood General Plan describes the growth of the City through the year 2010. One component of that Plan is the projection of trip generation and corresponding design of a transportation system to adequately accommodate the movement of vehicles. That system is specifically addressed in the General Plan=s Circulation Element which, among other components, includes a hierarchical roadway system with different classifications designed to carry traffic generated by planned development. The proposed project is consistent with future development levels planned in this part of Brentwood which have been included in the regional Traffic Models developed by the Contra Costa Transit Authority (CCTA) and Contra Costa County. The Applicant/Development of this project will be required to contribute to the construction of planned regional and local facilities. Although development is consistent with the levels identified in the General Plan, there could be some project specific impacts on the street system in the area which is a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

XV-30. Prior to the submittal for a final map, the Applicant/Developer shall submit a traffic/circulation study which identifies the necessary improvements which must be completed in order to implement the proposed development. The traffic/circulation study and recommended improvements shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

XV-31. The Applicant/Developer shall pay applicable thoroughfare facility fees (plus any annual increase) in effect at the time of building permit issuance and shall participate in the City=s Capital Improvement Financing Plan (CIFP) to finance necessary roadway infrastructure.

XV-32. The Applicant/Developer shall design and construct all public facilities within the subdivision including public streets, sidewalks, gutters, curbs, streetlights, and other related transportation improvements required by the City Engineer.

b. The City of Brentwood General Plan describes the growth of the City through the year 2010. The Circulation Element was based on trip generation projections and includes a corresponding transportation system designed to adequately accommodate the movement of vehicles. The proposed project is consistent with development levels identified in the Brentwood General Plan for the site. The circulation network is also planned and designed to meet the planned level of growth and development identified in the Planned Development. The proposed project consists of 65 residential units and would not generate enough project specific traffic to adversely affect the local circulation. The impact is, therefore, less-than-significant. 

3. The proposed project does not require any changes to existing regional air traffic activity and the project site is not located near an airport. Therefore, no impact would occur.

d. The proposed project does not include any unusual design features in the layout of the streets which would increase hazards. There is no impact associated with the proposed development.

e. The proposed project has public street access to all parcels and has adequate emergency access. Therefore, no impact would occur.

f. The proposed project consists of single family residences. Development of the single family homes must be consistent with the PD-20 Zone which ensure that adequate parking exists for the subdivision. Therefore, no impact would occur.

g. The proposed subdivision does not conflict with alternative transportation routes or policies. Therefore, no impact would occur.


Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.Would the project: 
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? G W G G
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? G W G G
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? G W G G
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? G W G G
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project=s projected demand in addition to the provider=s existing commitments? G W G G
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? G G W G
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? G G W G

Discussion

a-e. The proposed project would require the installation and necessary extension of all utility lines for water, sewer, electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable communications. Adequate capacity to serve the proposed project is or shall be available provided sufficient improvement fees are paid by the developer of the project in conjunction with the City=s Capital Improvements Funding Program. The impact on public utilities is potentially significant.


Mitigation Measure
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

XVI-33. The Applicant/Developer shall be required to connect to the existing Brentwood utility network as well as pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Improvement plans indicating conformance to City of Brentwood Standards shall be prepared, submitted, and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of encroachment permits for this project.

f,g. The proposed project consists of the development of single family residents at a density which is consistent with the General Plan. The solid waste generated by the development will be consistent with the levels which have been anticipated on the site. The impact is, therefore, less-than-significant.

Issues Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less-Than-Significant Impact No Impact
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self﷓sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? G G W G
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short﷓term, to the disadvantage of long﷓term, environmental goals? G G W G
c. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? G W G G
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? G W G G


Discussion

a,b. Development of rural areas to urban/suburban uses may be regarded as achieving short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. However, the inevitable impacts resulting from population and economic growth are mitigated by long-range planning to establish policies, programs, and measures for the efficient and economical use of resources. Long-term environmental goals, both broad and specific, have been addressed previously in several environmental documents, the most comprehensive being the General Plan Final EIR certified in 1993. Therefore, the impact is less-than-significant.

c,d. The loss of prime agricultural land is considered a Acumulatively considerable impact@ and a Asubstantial adverse impact,@ both direct and indirect, which were addressed with the General Plan Final EIR. Other cumulative impacts may be identified in the categories of population growth, use of resources, demand for services, and physical changes to the natural environment. These impacts would be considered potentially significant. They may be mitigated to a degree through mitigation measures cumulatively applied as development occurs, or they have been considered subject to findings of overriding benefit by the lead agency. The proposed development is consistent with the level of development which was anticipated in the General Plan. The previous mitigation and findings of overriding benefit result in a less-than-significant impact for the proposed subdivision.

Top of Page

[City Council]  [City Departments]  [City Forms]  [Boards/Commissions] [Passports] [Search] [FAQ]
[Municipal Code] [What's New]  [Employment]  [Links]  [General Information] [Table of Contents]