Agenda packet — Pleasant Hill City Council, May 18, 2023 (part 9 of 12)

Policy TC-12.5 Technology Safety Enhancements. Identify and deploy technology solutions to support bicycle and pedestrian safety through the City including passive detection systems at traffic signals and trail crossings.

Policy TC-12.10 Safe Intersections for Bicycles. Ensure adequate crossing times and detection for bicycle users at signalized intersections.

Goal TC-14 Provide for the safe and efficient movement of goods to support commerce, industry, and the community.

Policy TC-14.1 Minimize Truck Conflicts. Minimize potential conflicts between trucks and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel on streets designated as truck routes. [Source: New Policy]
Policy TC-14.2 Minimize Truck Loading and Unloading Conflicts. Minimize potential conflicts between truck loading and unloading and pedestrian, bicycle and transit travel.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1587 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.12-41
The above goals and policies are intended to result in roadway designs that safely accommodate all users including pedestrians, bikes, and vehicles. Therefore, with respect to increases of hazards due to design features, the General Plan would result in a less than significant operational impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant without mitigation
Emergency Vehicle Access
Significance Criterion d: Would the proposed plan result in inadequate emergency access? Impact TRA-4 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN WOULD NOT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO RESULT IN INADEQUATE EMERGENCY ACCESS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Construction
Impacts related to inadequate emergency access are limited to operational impacts. During future projects construction, two-way travel would be maintained. Should any roadways in the General Plan area experience temporary one-way travel restrictions or be closed to travel, there are multiple access routes to these plan areas, and construction detour signage would be provided. No respective construction impacts would occur.

Operation
As discussed in Section 3.9, Land Use/Planning and Population/Housing, the 2040 General Plan would result in an increase in population and development. Development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would be required to meet all applicable current State and local codes and ordinances related to fire protection, which includes emergency access.

As mentioned in Section 3.11, Public Services and Recreation, development facilitated by the General Plan would be adequately served by Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Stations No. 2 and No. 5. Further, as mentioned in Section 3.7, Hazards/Hazardous Materials and Wildfire, development facilitated by the General Plan would not impede emergency access and response.

Therefore, development within the General Plan area would be adequately served in case of a firerelated emergency. Development facilitated by the General Plan would be required to provide adequate accommodation of fire access to structure frontages, multiple access points to development, as well as adequate width, height, and turning radius of roadways and access points, pursuant to California Building Code requirements. Future projects that would not meet required standards and codes would not be allowed to be permitted by the City. Development facilitated by the General Plan would be required to comply with City and County standards and requirements and would undergo review by public safety officials as part of the approval process.

Emergency vehicle response times would continue to be reduced over time due to the ability of emergency vehicles to use vehicle preemption technology (where possible) and sirens; this capability would remain regardless of any roadway capacity modification. Roadway segments that would experience a reduction in vehicular roadway capacity, if any, would undergo individual operations analyses to assess the potential impacts to emergency vehicle access, and mitigation

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1588 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.12-42
measures would be developed as needed to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels. Additionally, development within the General Plan area would be required to comply with the California Fire Code, such as providing two separated and approved fire apparatus access roads that have a minimum width of 20 feet with turning radii of 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside. As such, there would be adequate emergency service and access associated with development facilitated by the General Plan.

Additionally, the 2040 General Plan includes the following goals, policies, and program related to provision of adequate emergency vehicle access to sites throughout Pleasant Hill:

Goal TC-1 Establish and maintain a safe and efficient circulation system that emphasizes the use of existing arterial and collector roadways, paths, and bike lanes.

Policy TC-1.2 Multi-Modal Travel Options. Develop a connected network of vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities that provide continuous, safe, and comfortable travel for users of all ages, abilities, and transportation modes.

Goal TC-2 Improve traffic circulation along the city roadway network.

Policy TC-2.1 Traffic Plan Requirement. Require new development to establish comprehensive construction traffic plans, for approval by City staff, which denote haul routes, detours, and other factors that may impact public safety.

Goal TC-4 Reduce congestion and vehicle trips through land use planning.

Policy TC-4.2 Develop Thoroughfares. Develop and improve thoroughfares based on existing and proposed land use patterns and projected demand.

Policy TC-4.5 Correlation Between Land Use and Transportation. Support land use patterns that make more efficient use of the transportation system, such as locating development near transit routes and high-quality bicycle/pedestrian facilities, minimizing new driveways, consolidating parking, and other best practice urban design measures.

Goal TC-8 Encourage the development of a comprehensive and integrated transportation network with infrastructure and design features that allow safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, seniors, youth, and families.

Policy TC-8.4 Multi-Modal Roadways. Consider the needs of vehicles, bicycle, and pedestrians on all city roadways and facilities.

Policy HS-3.11 Evacuation Routes. The City shall collaborate with Contra Costa County and neighboring cities as a part of the next Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update to identify evacuation routes in the event of wildfires or other natural disasters in compliance with AB 747 and SB 99.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1589 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.12-43
Hazards and Safety Element Implementation Programs
Program H Contra Costa County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. The City shall actively participate in the next update of the Contra Costa Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan that, among other outcomes, will identify evacuation routes in the City in compliance with AB 747 and SB 99.

Implementation of California Fire Code emergency vehicle access requirements and the aforementioned 2040 General Plan policies would ensure that there would be adequate emergency vehicle access throughout Pleasant Hill. Therefore, 2040 General Plan operational impacts related to emergency vehicle access adequacy would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant without mitigation

3.12.5 Cumulative Impacts
The transportation impact analysis (see Appendix E) prepared for the proposed plan also accounts for future land use for the entire travel model area, which includes VMT on Contra Costa County roadways that originates within and outside of the County. Adjacent development considered part of the cumulative analysis includes the projects and plan listed in Table 3-1 (refer to Chapter 3, Environmental Impact Analysis).

Vehicle Miles Traveled
OPR provides the following guidance regarding cumulative impacts analysis and VMT:

When using an absolute VMT metric, i.e., total VMT (as recommended below for retail and transportation projects), analyzing the combined impacts for a cumulative impacts analysis may be appropriate. However, metrics such as VMT per capita or VMT per employee, i.e., metrics framed in terms of efficiency (as recommended below for use on residential and office projects), cannot be summed because they employ a denominator. A project that falls below an efficiency-based threshold that is aligned with long-term environmental goals and relevant plans would have no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less-than-significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact, and vice versa.

The year 2040 total countywide VMT per service population (all residents and employees) is shown in Table 3.12-5. These metrics reflect VMT generated by all trips by all land uses in Contra Costa County, as well as non-County generated trips traveling on County roadways (i.e., all VMT within the Contra Costa County boundary). As shown in Table 3.12-5., Countywide boundary VMT per service population would decrease with the proposed plan, reflecting the travel efficiency that generally results from more dense, mixed-use development provided with the proposed plan.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1590 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.12-44
Table 3.12-5 Countywide VMT Summary
Metrics 2022 No Project
2040 with Existing
General Plan
2040 with Proposed
General Plan Update
Total 25,881,707 29,624,735 29,610,708
County Service Population 1,585,472 1,915,682 1,928,393 VMT/Service Population 16.324 15.464 15.355
Does VMT per service population
decrease with Project?
--- --- Yes
Source: CCTA Travel Demand Model; Fehr & Peers, October 2022.

While VMT per service population would decrease countywide, based on OPR’s guidance, included above, cumulative impacts would be commensurate with plan-level impacts. Because the analysis for the proposed plan is based on Home-Based VMT and Home-Work VMT, the significant VMT impact finding implies that the proposed plan would also have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. Since project-level significance thresholds were designed to support long-term environmental goals, they inherently also address potential cumulative VMT impacts. As such, VMT would be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the cumulative impact related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable.

Compatibility with Programs, Plans, Ordinances, and Policies Related to Circulation Cumulative plans and projects, including the proposed plan, would be required to comply with local regulations and policies. The plans’ incremental contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Roadway Safety and Emergency Vehicle Access
Roadways constructed as part of the proposed plan in conjunction with other cumulative plans and projects listed in Table 3-1 would be constructed to meet current design standards in respective cities. Modifications to public rights-of-way would be consistent with appropriate regulations and design standards set forth by the respective city’s applicable plans, programs, and policies. Similarly, cumulative development would also be required to comply with the respective city’s regulations and policies. Trucks necessary to construct cumulative development would utilize truck routes designated by the respective cities and would not conflict with the automobile traffic and bicycle and pedestrian activity along respective city streets. If cumulative development would redesign city streets in such a way that would significantly impact roadway safety, they would be required by the respective city to mitigate such impacts. Nevertheless, Pleasant Hill’s contribution to potential cumulative roadway safety impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. In addition, driveways and emergency vehicle access points associated with cumulative development would be constructed in compliance with the California Fire Code and other applicable regulations related to roadway safety and emergency access. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to roadway safety and emergency vehicle access would be less than significant.

Overall Level of Cumulative Significance
Significant and unavoidable

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1591 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-1

3.13 Utilities and Service Systems

3.13.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing conditions related to utilities and service systems (water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste) within the respective utility service areas, which cover the 2040 Pleasant Hill General Plan area vicinity as well as the relevant regulatory framework. This section also evaluates the impacts related to such utilities and service systems that could result from implementation of the proposed plan. Information in this section is based on information from the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD), East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), the Martinez Water District (MWD), and Pleasant Hill Department of Public Works. Note that electrical power and natural gas are addressed within Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy.

3.13.2 Environmental Setting
Water
Water Source and Supply
The residences and businesses within the General Plan area are served by three water supply providers: 1) Contra Costa Water District (CCWD); 2) East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD); and 3) Martinez Water District. The service area boundaries for the three water purveyors are shown on Figure 3.13-1. A description of each of these providers and the water source and supply provided by each is provided below.

CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
CCWD provides water service to a portion of the City of Pleasant Hill. CCWD provides treated and untreated water to approximately 500,000 people in Contra Costa County. The District’s service area encompasses most of central and northeastern Contra Costa County, a total area of more than 140,000 acres. The District obtains its water supply almost exclusively from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta at four intake facilities. The intakes are located at Rock Slough, Old River, Middle River at Victoria Canal, and Mallard Slough. The backbone of the District’s water conveyance system is the 48-mile Contra Costa Canal, which starts at Rock Slough and ends at the Martinez Reservoir.

Four untreated water reservoirs, Los Vaqueros, Contra Loma, Mallard, and Martinez, provide a total of approximately 165,000 AF of storage. These reservoirs are used to store water for blending and water quality purposes, dry-year and emergency use, supplying during peak demands, and flow regulation. There are approximately 61,550 connections in the treated water service area covering the Cities of Clyde, Concord, Clayton, Pacheco, Port Costa, and portions of Martinez, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek.1
1 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2022. Service Area Map https://www.ccwater.com/289/Service-Area-Map. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1592 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-2
Figure 3.13-1 Water Districts in General Plan Area

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1593 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-3

EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
A portion of the water supplied to the City of Pleasant Hill is provided by EBMUD, which provides service to approximately 1.4 million people in a 332-square-mile-area of the San Francisco Bay Area East Bay region.
2 Approximately 90 percent of the raw water entering EBMUD’s system originates from the Mokelumne River watershed and approximately 10 percent originates from the protected watershed lands in the East Bay Area. EBMUD’s water supply system consists of a network of reservoirs, aqueducts, water treatment plants, pumping plants, and other distribution facilities and pipelines that convey Mokelumne River water from the Pardee Reservoir to the EBMUD service areas. Recycled water is a critical element of EBMUD’s water supply management policy and supplements EBMUD’s limited drinking water supply, producing approximately 8.3 million gallons per day (mgd) in 2020 from the six existing recycled water projects with potential for additional recycled water projects to take place in the future. EBMUD does not currently have supplies of groundwater, stormwater, or desalinated water.
3 MARTINEZ WATER DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
Martinez Water District supplies water to a small northwestern portion of Pleasant Hill residents.

The District’s water service area encompasses approximately 10,300 acres, extending from outside the City of Martinez limits into unincorporated Contra Costa County and the City of Pleasant Hill.

The Martinez Water District receives untreated imported water from CCWD via the Contra Costa Canal, which is part of the Central Valley Project developed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The water is sold to and represents 100 percent of the water supply for the Martinez Water District’s water service area. Therefore, water source and supply associated with the Martinez Water District are dependent on the availability of water through CCWD and are not further discussed within this EIR Utilities and Service Systems section; rather, the CCWD discussion in this EIR Utilities and Service Systems section is assumed to also encompass Martinez Water District aspects.

Water Demand and Use

CCWD SYSTEM
CCWD is responsible for preparing and implementing an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP).

The CCWD 2020 UWMP includes current and projected demand and water supply in five-year increments through the year 2045.
4 As discussed within the UWMP, projected demands would be higher without water use efficiency measures, which play a key role in reducing future water demand and, thus, reduce the need for additional supplies. The CCWD system does not anticipate supply deficits in normal years or single-dry years throughout 2045 and may have supply shortfalls in future years of up to 15 percent of demand in the later years of a multiple dry year conditions.5 The CCWD UWMP states that the current CCWD system has capacity to meet future demands through continued use of its CVP contract, its own water rights, and balanced investments in conservation, recycled water, and water transfers.
2 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2022. Service area. https://www.ebmud.com/about-us/who-we-are/service-area/. (accessed November 2022).
3 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan/. (accessed November 2022). 4 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ccwater.com/289/Service-Area-Map. (accessed November 2022).
5 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ccwater.com/289/Service-Area-Map. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1594 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-4

EBMUD SYSTEM
EBMUD is also responsible for preparing and implementing an UWMP. The EBMUD 2020 UWMP includes an assessment of past and future water supplies and demands, evaluation of the future reliability of the region’s water supplies through 2050, and discussion of demand management measures.6 EBMUD has water rights that allow for delivery of up to a maximum of 325 mgd. In addition, on average, local runoff supplies the East Bay 23 mgd. During multi-year droughts when the Mokelumne River and local runoff alone cannot meet projected customer demand, EBMUD signed a contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for delivery of Central Valley Project (CVP) water providing for delivery of up to 133,000 acre-feet (AF) or approximately 36,087 mgd in a single qualifying year, not to exceed a total of 165,000 AF or 44,769 mgd in three consecutive qualifying years. The EBMUD UWMP states that the current EBMUD system has capacity to meet water demands during normal, single dry, and second dry year demands through 2050; however, current water supply is not sufficient to meet water demands during third dry years.7 In 2020, EBMUD also updated its Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) that provides a framework for EBMUD to help address water shortages that may occur to ensure a reliable water supply.8

GENERAL PLAN AREA
Water consumption patterns in the General Plan area is a function of many independent factors including growth, weather conditions, economic conditions, and water conservation efforts.

CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
According to the CCWD 2020 UWMP, total water supply demand for its service area in 2020 was 117,110 acre-feet per year (AFY), of which 32,600 AFY was for the Treated Water Service Area (TWSA)9 portion of the District and which the majority of Pleasant Hill is located within. Demands have fluctuation in the past ten years with declines seen a result of the recession and droughts and increases associated with growth and rebound from the recession and droughts.10

EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
Demand for water in the EBMUD service area is primarily for municipal and industrial uses that include residential, commercial, institutional, industrial, and irrigation. According to the EBMUD 2020 UWMP, total water supply demand for its service area in 2020 was 202,880 AFY.11 While the number of EBMUD customers has increased steadily since 1970, the average daily water demand has not increased correspondingly; outside of droughts, demand remains relatively stable.12 Several factors contributed to keeping the overall water demand from rising as might otherwise be 6 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan/. (accessed November 2022). 7 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan/. (accessed November 2022). 8 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2020. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan/. (accessed November 2022). 9 CCWD is a retail provider of treated water to approximately 205,000 residents in Clayton, Clyde, Concord, Pacheco, Port Costa and portions of Martinez, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek, referred to as the Treated Water Service Area (TWSA) 10 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ccwater.com/289/Service-Area-Map. (accessed November 2022).
11 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. (accessed November 2022). 12 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1595 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-5
anticipated, including EBMUD’s water recycling and conservation programs, changes in customer usage patterns, and legislative changes.

Water Infrastructure and Distribution

WATER TREATMENT
Contra Costa Water District Service Area
CCWD operates three water treatment plants (WTP). The Bollman WTP, located in Concord, provides treated water to the City of Pleasant Hill. The 75 MGD Bollman WTP treatment process includes coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, ozonation, and disinfection. The District’s treated water distribution system consists of more than 800 miles of pipelines, 40 storage reservoirs with a total capacity of 72 million gallons, and 30 pump stations.

East Bay Municipal Utility District Service Area
EBMUD has six WTPs located in the EBMUD service area. Three of the WTPs are conventional treatment plants that use rapid mixing, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and free chlorine disinfection to treat water. Two of these plants, Sobrante and Upper San Leandro, also have ozone and peroxide for taste and odor control. The three inline WTPs have a simpler treatment process consisting of coagulation, filtration, and disinfection. They do not have a sedimentation process and rely on a pristine, low-turbidity raw water source in Pardee Reservoir. All the WTPs meet and exceed California drinking water regulations.

General Plan Area
No WTPs are located within the General Plan area. The City of Pleasant Hill receives water from the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta, Mokelumne Watershed, EBMUD Reservoir. All water derived from these sources is treated at one of two treatment plants: the Bollman WTP or the Walnut Creek WTP.

The Bollman WTP primarily treats water from the CCWD System reservoirs and has both a peak capacity of 75 mgd and sustainable capacity of 72 mgd. The Walnut Creek WTP treats water from the EBMUD System reservoirs and has a permitted capacity of 115 mgd.

Wastewater
Wastewater Generation

CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
The City of Pleasant Hill is served by the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San), which is responsible for the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater within the Central San service area. Central San provides roughly 487,300 customers and 3,000 businesses with sanitary sewer service over 147 square miles in the central Contra Costa area. Formed in 1946 as a Special District in Contra Costa County, California, Central San has 294 budgeted employees and operates a 1,500- mile network of collection system piping and a treatment plant that processes an average daily flow of 32 million gallons.

The Central San wastewater collection system includes 1,535 miles of <6- to 102-inch-diameter sewers and 30,887 manholes across its service area. The system includes 18 sewage-pumping stations. Existing sewer lines convey wastewater generated by land uses within the City of Pleasant

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1596 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-6
Hill to the Central San Treatment Plant for treatment and then disposal or reuse.13 The Central San collection system master plan identifies facility improvements necessary to maintain collection service at or above this level.

Operation of the collection system is subject to the SWRCB’s General Waste Discharge Requirement (Order No. 2006-0003) to reduce sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) by requiring all feasible steps to control the volume of waste discharged into the system, to prevent sanitary sewer waste from entering the storm sewer system, and to develop a Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). Central San updated their SSMP in 2022 which seeks to provide a plan and schedule to properly manage, operate, and maintain all parts of the district’s sanitary sewer system.14 In addition to the SSMP, the Central San Treatment Master Plan identifies facility improvements necessary to maintain treatment service at or above the current level, which are prioritized and scheduled for implementation in an annually updated Capital Improvement Budget and 10-year Capital Improvement Program.

GENERAL PLAN AREA
Central Sans owns and operates 18 pump stations and associated force mains. The collection system is sized for an average dry weather flow of up to 32 MGD and a peak wet weather flow of approximately 230 MGD.

Wastewater Treatment

CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT SERVICE AREA
Central San operates the Central San Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) where wastewater is treated and then discharged into Suisun Bay. The Central San WWTP is located in an unincorporated area of Contra Costa County adjacent to the City of Martinez. The Central San WWTP has a treatment capacity of 54 million gpd and treats an average of 35.6 million gallons of wastewater per day.
15 On average, the WWTP processes approximately 32 million gallons of wastewater each day during the dry season and can see peak flows as high as an estimated 230 million gallons per day during an extreme winter storm.16 Approximately 600 million gallons per year are treated to a tertiary level through additional filtration and disinfection before being distributed as recycled water for landscape irrigation, industrial processes, and plant operations.

GENERAL PLAN AREA
Wastewater generated in the General Plan area is conveyed to the Central San Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) where it is treated and then discharged into Suisun Bay. 13 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. 14 CCCSD, Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. 2022. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District Sewer System Management Plan, Adopted October 6, 2022. https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/fileattachments/2020_ssmp_approved_audit_06.05.2020.pdf?1620312805. (accessed November 2022). 15 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2022. Central San Treatment Plant. https://www.centralsan.org/treatment-plant. (accessed November 2022).
16 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2017. Comprehensive Wastewater Master Plan Executive Summary. https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/cwmp_executive_summary.pdf?1510867154. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1597 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-7
Stormwater
Stormwater Infrastructure and Collection

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS SERVICE AREA
Pleasant Hill is located within the Contra Costa County Public Works stormwater service area. The Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District guides regional drainage plans throughout incorporated and unincorporated County areas. All stormwater drains into Suisun Bay via stormwater drainage systems and regional creeks and streams. The County Watershed Program is responsible for ensuring that the County complies with its municipal stormwater NPDES permits in unincorporated County land only.17 The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) is responsible for ensuring that the County and incorporated cities comply with its municipal stormwater NPDES permits. Contra Costa County Public Works owns and maintains unincorporated County drainage facilities. Incorporated cities within the service area of the Contra Costa County Public Works maintain drainage facilities within the municipality City limits.18 The CCCWP offers education and outreach to residents and businesses throughout the County to help them reduce stormwater pollution. In addition, the CCCWP provides Best Management Practice (BMP) information and pollution prevention for municipal operations, new and redevelopment planning, industrial/commercial site controls, water quality monitoring, pesticide toxicity controls, trash reduction in creeks and land, mercury and Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) controls, and other stormwater related compliance and enforcement activities through education and outreach to the public.19

GENERAL PLAN AREA
Pleasant Hill is within the CCCWP Central County Watersheds Planning Unit which includes the cities Concord, Clayton, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, and Lafayette. Stormwater in this area generally drains from the Mount Diablo foothills through suburban areas to Suisun Bay (Walnut Creek and Mount Diablo Creek), which is tributary to San Pablo Bay, or the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Willow and Kirker Creeks).
20 Stormwater runoff within the City of Pleasant Hill is collected and disposed of by an integrated system of storm drains, inlets, curbside gutters, catch basins, drainage ditches, and man-made channels. City of Pleasant Hill maintenance personnel inspect, clean, and maintain over 1,500 storm drains within Pleasant Hill, covering over 150 miles of piping systems, ensuring inlets and drains are clear of debris in order to ensure stormwater flows freely to Suisan Bay.
21 17 Contra Costa County Flood Control District. 2019. http://www.cccounty.us/5586/Flood-Control. (accessed November 2022). 18 Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Drainage, Watershed, and Water Quality FAQs, page 5. 19 Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP). 2022, Program Activities. https://www.cccleanwater.org/about/program-activities. (accessed November 2022).
20 Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP). 2019. Contra Costa Watersheds Stormwater Resource Plan. https://www.cccleanwater.org/userfiles/kcfinder/files/CCW%20SWRP%20Main%20%2B%20App%20A.pdf. (accessed December 2022). 21 City of Pleasant Hill. Streets, Storm Drains, and Graffiti. 2022. https://www.ci.pleasant-hill.ca.us/170/Streets-Storm-Drains-Graffiti. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1598 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-8
Telecommunications
Telecommunication services include telephone service (both landlines and mobile service) and internet service for businesses and homes.

Telecommunications Demand

CITY OF PLEASANT HILL (GENERAL PLAN AREA)
The City of Pleasant Hill telecommunications demand is met by Xfinity and AT&T within the General Plan area.

Telecommunications Infrastructure and Distribution

CITY OF PLEASANT HILL (GENERAL PLAN AREA)
Telecommunications infrastructure within Pleasant Hill includes underground optical fibers, cell towers, and standard phone equipment and internet routers. Telecommunications providers own and operate infrastructure, such as cellphone towers and fiber optic cables, within Pleasant Hill (the Genera Plan area).

Solid Waste
Solid Waste Collection

REPUBLIC SERVICES SERVICE AREA
Republic Services provides residential and commercial solid waste, organics, and recycling collection services. Republic Services provides collection services to multiple Contra Costa County cities and unincorporated areas within the county. In addition to collection services, Republic Services provides free waste audits, information for tenants, and indoor recycling receptacles for customers.

GENERAL PLAN AREA
Republic Services provides residential and commercial solid waste and recycling collection services for the General Plan area. Pleasant Hill's solid waste is processed at the Republic Services Contra Costa Transfer Station at 951 Waterbird Way in Martinez. Solid waste is then transported Acme and Keller Canyon Landfills, located in located in the City of Martinez and City of Pittsburg, respectively.

Solid Waste Disposal

REPUBLIC SERVICES SERVICE AREA
According to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the Acme Landfill has a remaining capacity of approximately 506,590 cubic yards. 22 The Keller Canyon Landfill
has a remaining capacity of 63,408,410 cubic yards. Table 3.13-1 shows the estimated permitted and remaining capacity and current status of the Acme and Keller Canyon Landfills.23 Republic Services takes Pleasant Hill commercial and residential organics to a composting facility at Golden 22 CalRecycle. 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Acme Landfill (07-AA-0002). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4396?siteID=217. (accessed November 2022). 23 CalRecycle. 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Keller Canyon Landfill (07-AA-0032). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4407?siteID=228. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1599 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-9
Bear Transfer Station/West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill in Richmond, CA, which has a current processing capacity of 85,000 tons/year of green waste/food waste.24 Table 3.13-1 Estimated Landfill Capacity and Closure Date Landfill Facility
Permitted Capacity
(cubic yards)
Remaining Capacity
(cubic yards) Status
Acme Landfill25 6,195,000 506,590 Active
Keller Canyon Landfill26 75,018,280 63,408,410 Active
Source: Cal Recycle
Municipal solid waste comes from primarily the Bay Area region, but also from more distant municipalities and cities. CalRecycle reports that in 2019 a total of 24,482 tons of solid waste from Pleasant Hill was disposed at 15 different landfills.

GENERAL PLAN AREA
The City’s Solid Waste and Recycling Program manages the City’s Solid Waste Ordinance and the City’s waste hauling franchise with Republic Services. The program also develops programs for diversion from the landfills, and recycling grants for used motor oil, and beverage containers.27 Over 94 percent (23,144 tons) of Pleasant Hill’s solid waste generated in 2019 went to the Keller Canyon Landfill.28

3.13.3 Regulatory Framework
Federal Regulations
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act, enacted by Congress in 1972 and amended several times since, is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the United States and forms the basis for several State and local laws throughout the country. The Act established the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act gave the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency the authority to implement federal pollution control programs, such as setting water quality standards for contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry categories, and imposing requirements for controlling nonpoint-source pollution. At the federal level, the Clean Water Act is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. At the State and regional levels in California, the act is administered and enforced by the SWRCB and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs).
24 Email correspondence on November 15, 2022 with Ann James, P.E., Maintenance Superintendent at the City of Pleasant Hill 25 CalRecycle. 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Acme Landfill (07-AA-0002). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4396?siteID=217. (accessed November 2022). 26 CalRecycle. 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Keller Canyon Landfill (07-AA-0032). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4407?siteID=228. (accessed November 2022). 27 Pleasant Hill, City of. 2022. Trash & Recycling Services in Pleasant Hill. https://www.pleasanthillca.org/382/Solid-Waste-RecyclingProgram. (accessed December 2022). 28 CalRecycle. 2020. Jurisdiction Disposal and Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Tons by Facility. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/DisposalByFacility. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1600 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-10
Clean Water Act Section 402
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act requires that all construction sites on an acre or greater of land, as well as municipal, industrial and commercial facilities discharging wastewater or stormwater directly from a point source, such as a pipe, ditch, or channel, into a surface water of the United States must obtain permission under the NPDES permit. All NPDES permits are written to ensure that the surface water receiving discharges will achieve specified water quality standards.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES permit program was established in the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States. Federal NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges, including point-source municipal waste discharges and nonpoint-source stormwater runoff. NPDES permits generally identify effluent and receiving water limits on allowable concentrations and/or mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge; prohibitions on discharges not specifically allowed under the permit; and provisions that describe required actions by the discharger, including industrial pretreatment, pollution prevention, self-monitoring, and other activities. Wastewater discharge is regulated under the NPDES permit program for direct discharges into receiving waters and by the National Pretreatment Program for indirect discharges to a sewage treatment plant.

Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 258 (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCRA, Subtitle D) contains regulations for municipal solid waste landfills and requires states to implement their own permitting programs incorporating the federal landfill criteria. The federal regulations address the location, operation, design, groundwater monitoring, and closure of landfills.

State Regulations
California Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
In September 2014, Governor Brown signed legislation requiring that California’s critical groundwater resources be sustainably managed by local agencies. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act gives local agencies the power to sustainably manage groundwater and requires groundwater sustainability plans to be developed for medium- and high-priority groundwater basins.

California Senate Bills 610 and 221 (Water Supply Assessment and Verification) Senate Bills (SB) 610 and 221 amended State law, effective January 1, 2002, to improve the link between the information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to city and county decision-makers prior to approval of specified large development projects with greater than 500 dwelling units or 500,000 square feet of commercial space. Both statutes also require this detailed information to be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. Under SB 610 water assessments must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects as defined in Water Code 10912 subject to CEQA. Under SB 221

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1601 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-11
approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply.

California Water Plan
The California Department of Water Resources is responsible for preparing and updating the California Water Plan, which is a policy document that guides the development and management of State water resources. The plan is updated every five years to reflect changes in resources and urban, agricultural, and environmental water demands. The California Water Plan suggests ways of managing demand and augmenting supply to balance water supply with demand.

California Urban Water Management Planning Act
In 1983 the California Legislature enacted the Urban Water Management Planning Act (Water Code Section 10610–10656). The Act states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides over 3,000 acre-feet annually, should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The Act requires that urban water suppliers adopt an urban water management plan at least once every five years and submit them to the Department of Water Resources. Noncompliant urban water suppliers are ineligible to receive funding pursuant to Division 24, commencing with Section 78500, or Division 26, commencing with Section 79000, or receive drought assistance from the State until the UWMP is submitted and deemed complete pursuant to the Urban Water Management Planning Act.

California Senate Bill 7x7 (Statewide Water Conservation) In November 2009 the California State Legislature passed and the Governor approved a comprehensive package of water legislation, including SB 7x7 addressing water conservation. In general SB 7x7 requires a 20 percent reduction in per capita urban water use by 2020, with an interim 10 percent target in 2015. The legislation requires urban water users to develop consistent water use targets and to use those targets in their UWMPs.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code) The State of California is authorized to administer Federal or State laws regulating water pollution within the State. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code Section 13000, et seq.) includes provisions to address requirements of the Clean Water Act. These provisions include National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting, dredge and fill programs, and civil and administrative penalties. The Porter-Cologne Act is broad in scope and addresses issues relating to the conservation, control, and utilization of the water resources of the State.

Additionally, the Porter-Cologne Act states that the quality of all the waters of the State, including groundwater and surface water, must be protected for the use and enjoyment by the people of the State.

In California, the NPDES program is administered by the SWRCB through the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) and requires municipalities to obtain permits that outline programs and activities to control wastewater and stormwater pollution. The federal Clean Water Act prohibits discharges of stormwater from construction projects unless the discharge is in compliance with an NPDES permit. The SWRCB is the permitting authority in California, and adopted an NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, otherwise known as the Construction General Permit (Order 2009-0009, as amended by Orders

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1602 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-12
2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ). The Order applies to construction sites that include one or more acre of soil disturbance. Construction activities include clearing, grading, grubbing, excavation, stockpiling, and reconstruction of existing facilities involving removal or replacement. The Construction General Permit requires that the landowner and/or contractor file permit registration documents prior to commencing construction and then pay a fee annually through the duration of construction. These documents include a notice of intent, risk assessment, site map, stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and signed certification statement. The SWPPP must include measures to ensure that: all pollutants and their sources are controlled; non-stormwater discharges are identified and eliminated, controlled, or treated; site Best Management Practices (BMPs) are effective and result in the reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non-stormwater discharges; and BMPs installed to reduce or eliminate pollutants after construction are completed and maintained. The Construction General Permit specifies minimum BMP requirements for stormwater control based on the risk level of the site. The Permit also specifies minimum qualifications for a qualified SWPPP developer and qualified SWPPP practitioner.

State Water Resources Control Board General Waste Discharge Requirement The SWRCB adopted a General Waste Discharge Requirement (Order No. 2006-0003) for all publicly owned sanitary sewer collection systems in California with more than 1 mile of sewer pipe. The order provides a consistent statewide approach to reducing sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) by requiring public sewer system operators to take all feasible steps to control the volume of waste discharged into the system, to prevent sanitary sewer waste from entering the storm sewer system, and to develop a Sewer System Management Plan. The General Waste Discharge Requirement also requires that storm sewer overflows be reported to the SWRCB using an online reporting system.

The SWRCB has delegated authority to nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to enforce these requirements within their region. NPDES permits allow the RWQCB to regulate where and how the waste is disposed, including the discharge volume and effluent limits of the waste and the monitoring and reporting responsibilities of the discharger. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB issues and enforces NPDES permits in Pleasant Hill.

California Assembly Bill 939
AB 939 (Public Resources Code 41780) requires cities and counties to prepare integrated waste management plans and to divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills beginning in calendar year 2000 and each year thereafter. AB 939 also requires cities and counties to prepare Source Reduction and Recycling Elements as part of the integrated waste management plans. These elements are designed to develop recycling services to achieve diversion goals, stimulate local recycling in manufacturing and stimulate the purchase of recycled products.

California Assembly Bill 341
The purpose of AB 341 is to reduce GHG emissions by diverting commercial solid waste to recycling efforts and to expand the opportunity for additional recycling services and recycling manufacturing facilities in California. AB 341 required all businesses that generate four or more cubic yards of garbage per week and multi-family dwellings with five or more units to recycle by July 1, 2012.

AB341 also sets a statewide goal of 75 percent waste diversion.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1603 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-13
California Senate Bill 1016
SB 1016 requires that the 50 percent solid waste diversion requirement established by AB 939 be expressed in pounds per person per day. SB 1016 changed the CalRecycle review process for each municipality’s integrated waste management plan. After an initial determination of diversion requirements in 2006 and establishing diversion rates for subsequent calendar years, the Board reviews a jurisdiction’s diversion rate compliance in accordance with a specified schedule. Beginning January 1, 2018, the Board will be required to review a jurisdiction’s source reduction and recycling element and hazardous waste element once every two years.

California Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 was adopted in September 2016 and establishes targets to achieve a 75 percent reduction in the level of Statewide landfilled organic waste from the 2014 level by 2025. The law grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. In addition, SB 1383 regulations require that jurisdictions conduct education and outreach on organics recycling to all residents, businesses, haulers, solid waste facilities, and local food banks and other food recovery organizations.

Regional and Local Regulations
CCWD 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
The CCWD 2020 UWMP is an update to the 2015 UWMP adopted by the District’s Board of Directors and is prepared in compliance with the California Urban Water Management Planning Act. The UWMP includes the District’s planning activities to ensure adequate water supplies to meet existing and future demands for water. The 2020 UWMP presents information on the District’s supply and demand forecasts, conservation programs, water demand management measures, and recycled water opportunities through the year 2045. The 2020 UWMP addresses the requirements of the Water Conservation Bill of 2009, SB X7-7, demonstrating compliance with the 2020 per capita water use target reduction, as well as more recent legislation, AB 1668 and SB 606, with inclusion of a Drought Risk Assessment and Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The UWMP also includes a description of the plan adoption, public coordination, and planning coordination activities.

EBMUD 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
The EBMUD UWMP 2020 is an update of the UWMP 2015. It is designed to satisfy the requirements of the Urban Water Management Planning Act and provide the public with a supply and demand report on EBMUD’s progress in implementing conservation and water recycling programs, including efforts to secure supplemental water supply sources. The UWMP 2020 also contains data on EBMUD’s compliance with SB X7-7, the state law mandating that urban water agencies reduce water use in order to achieve a statewide reduction of 20% by 2020. EBMUD prepared the UWMP 2020 to comply with all current applicable regulations and statutes. In adopting its UWMP, EBMUD commits to managing water demand efficiently using its water supplies to protect both its customers and its water and natural resources, and making every effort to ensure the appropriate level of water service reliability is met given varied water demands during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1604 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-14
Contra Costa Clean Water Program
The CCCWP includes 21 local government agencies who each own and operate a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). The primary goal of CCCWP is to reduce the pollution carried by stormwater throughout Contra Costa County into creeks, wetlands, and the Bay/Delta. CCCWP is responsible for maintaining compliance with the NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit within the County and works to promote stormwater pollution prevention.

Municipal Stormwater Permitting Program
The San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2015- 0049 (MRP) issues the Waste Discharge Requirements and NPDES Permit for the discharge of stormwater runoff from the municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) of over 70 municipalities, including Pleasant Hill, and local agencies in five Bay Area counties29. Under the MRP, permittees are prohibited from non-stormwater discharges into storm drain systems and watercourses. Permitted discharges must not cause or contribute to a violation of any applicable water quality standard for receiving waters. Upon a determination by either the MRP permittee(s) or the RWQCB that discharges are causing or contributing to an exceedance of an applicable water quality standards, the permittee(s) must notify, within no more than 30 days, and thereafter submit a report to the RWQCB. The report must describe controls or best management practices (BMPs) that are currently being implemented, and the current level of implementation, and additional controls or BMPs that will be implemented, and/or an increased level of implementation, to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants that are causing or contributing to the exceedance of water quality standards. The MRP also sets forth requirements for monitoring water quality.

Provision C.3 of the MRP establishes discharge requirements for new development and redevelopment projects. The goal of Provision C.3 is for the MRP permittees to use their planning authorities to include appropriate source control, site design, and stormwater treatment measures in new development and redevelopment projects to address stormwater runoff pollutant discharges and prevent increases in runoff flows from new development and redevelopment projects.

According to the MRP, this goal is to be accomplished primarily through the implementation of low impact development (LID) techniques.

Pleasant Hill General Plan
The current Pleasant Hill General Plan contains policies related to utilities and service systems, but they would be replaced by the proposed 2040 General Plan.

Pleasant Hill Municipal Code Title 18 (Planning and Land Use) and Title 14 (Buildings and Construction)
The City of Pleasant Hill Municipal Code contains all ordinances for the City of Pleasant Hill. The Municipal Code is organized by Title, Chapter, and Section. The current Municipal Code is up to date through Ordinance 956, passed April 4, 2022.
29 SWRCB. 2015. San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/stormwater/Municipal/R2_2015_0049_amended.pdf. (accessed March 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1605 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-15
CHAPTER 18.52 WATER-EFFICIENT LANDSCAPING
This chapter ensures the requirements of the State Water Conservation in Landscaping Act (Government Code §§ 65591–65599) are implemented. This chapter would require all projects to submit a water-efficient landscape plan and have the plan approved prior to construction. The water-efficient landscape plan would include calculations of the maximum applied water allowance and estimated total water use. In addition, the water-efficient landscape plan would include required elements of plant materials, irrigation system design, water features, and grading and soil preparation.

CHAPTER 14.40 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS
The proposed plan shall comply with this chapter as a condition of approval, which shall require a Waste Management Plan (WMP). The WMP shall include the following:
 The total square footage of the area to be constructed or demolished;  a list of the C&D debris material types to be generated;  The identity of the vendor(s) or facility(ies) that the applicant proposes to use to collect or receive that material; and
 An acknowledgement of responsibility that the applicant understands the consequences of not meeting the 65% diversion requirement and that the applicant is responsible for the actions of their contractors or other agents with regard to the diversion requirement.

3.13.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Significance Criteria
The City of Pleasant Hill utilizes the following 2022 CEQA Guidelines Appendix G significance criteria questions related to Utilities and Service Systems.

Would the 2040 General Plan:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) 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?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Approach to Analysis
Environmental impacts to utilities and service systems have been assessed using impact significance criteria from federal, State, and local regulations. The impact analysis is based on available literature

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1606 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-16
regarding the existing plans, policies, and resources in the General Plan area. Criteria used during this analysis are described below:

Water
The water supply analysis in this section is based on information included in the Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) for each of the aforementioned districts. The availability of data from UWMPs is complex for the proposed plan, because the City of Pleasant Hill is served by multiple water supply providers and the respective UWMP boundaries do not align with the boundaries of the General Plan area. In addition, each of the three separate water suppliers have used different types of assumptions to make water demand estimates for their service territories. Therefore, an “apples to apples” comparison of water use and forecasted water demand in each service territory is not possible based on available published data. Therefore, in order to characterize water supply availability using the most reliable available information, this analysis relies upon data provided in the CCWD UWMP and the EBMUD UWMP. These two UWMPs provide detailed system description, system demands (including cumulative growth assumptions), water reduction planning, system supplies, water quality information, groundwater information, water supply reliability information, water shortage contingency planning, demand management measures, as well as information on climate change.

Wastewater
Wastewater production was calculated and compared with treatment capacity to determine whether wastewater treatment requirements would be exceeded. Wastewater discharge permitting requirements were also reviewed.

Stormwater
Stormwater production was calculated and compared with City of Pleasant Hill stormwater facility treatment capacity to determine whether stormwater collection requirements would be exceeded.

Solid Waste
Solid waste production was calculated and compared with the applicable landfill capacity to determine whether landfill daily permitted capacity and total storage capacity would be exceeded.

The City’s solid waste regulations and policies were also reviewed.

Telecommunications
The telecommunications providers in the City of Pleasant Hill were identified and ability to provide service verified.

See Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy, for discussions related to electricity and natural gas.

EIR Scoping Comments Consideration
This section programmatically addresses an EBMUD EIR scoping comment about analyzing impacts of water service and future development within EBMUD’s service area; see discussions under Impact UTL-1 and Impact UTL-2. In addition, this section addresses an EIR scoping comment about future water supply which is addressed within Impact UTL-2.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1607 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-17
Specific Thresholds of Significance
For purposes of this analysis, the following thresholds are used to evaluate the significance of utilities and service systems impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed plan.  Create a need for relocated, new, or expanded water supply, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage facilities, or telecommunications facilities, the construction of which would result in significant construction-related transportation, air quality, GHG emissions, energy, or noise impacts. If new or altered facilities are proposed or determined to be needed, then determination of significance of construction-related transportation, air quality, GHG emissions, energy, or noise impacts is based on the respective specific thresholds of significance listed in Section 3.12, Transportation; Section 3.2, Air Quality; Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy; and Section 3.10, Noise.
 Result in insufficient water supply to serve the proposed plan’s potable water demand during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
 Inadequate capacity at the Central San facility to serve the proposed plan’s wastewater generation
 Insufficient daily capacity or permitted daily capacity at the Keller Canyon Landfill and Acme Landfill to serve waste generation of the proposed plan.  Unable to comply with AB 939 solid waste diversion goals.

Impact Evaluation
Need for Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and Telecommunication Facilities Significance Criterion a: Would the proposed plan require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Impact UTL-1 DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN WOULD INCREASE DEMAND FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, STORMWATER, AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES. WHILE UTILITY FACILITIES AND

INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND RELOCATION FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PLAN WOULD OCCUR IN

DEVELOPED AREAS OF PLEASANT HILL WHERE SUCH FACILITIES EXIST, CONSTRUCTION-RELATED IMPACTS WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE EVEN WITH MITIGATION.

Construction
No new or expanded water, wastewater, stormwater, or telecommunications facilities are specifically proposed as part of the 2040 General Plan. However, the 2040 General Plan would provide the framework for development of up to 19,216 net new primary and accessory dwelling residential units in the city of Pleasant Hill. As a result, CCWD, EBMUD, Martinez Water District, Central San, and local telecommunications providers could need to increase their water supply, wastewater, stormwater, and telecommunications services to the City of Pleasant Hill through the year 2040, which could in turn require the construction of new or expanded facilities to accommodate additional utility supply and collection. The placement and potential impacts of a new utility infrastructure and facilities are unknown at this time; if construction or expansion of future facilities are needed, separate environmental review would be required, which could result in development and implementation of future project-specific construction-related mitigation measures. The 2040 General Plan facilitates development within areas of Pleasant Hill that are

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1608 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-18
currently developed. As such, construction of new utility infrastructure or facilities, if required, would likely occur on property previously disturbed or developed and thus within the programmatic analysis for buildout under the 2040 General Plan as analyzed throughout this EIR. Additionally, construction would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing the provision of utility infrastructure and utilities. This would reduce the potential for adverse construction impacts associated with construction of new or expanded utility and infrastructure and facilities associated with implementation of the 2040 General Plan. However significant and unavoidable construction impacts associated with air quality, historic resources, paleontological resources, and noise were determined in Sections 3.2, Air Quality, 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, 3.5, Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources, and 3.10, Noise, respectively.

Therefore, construction impacts related to potential need for new or expanded utility infrastructure and facilities would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Operation
WATER
The UWMPs for both CCWD and EBMUD determined that there are sufficient water supplies to accommodate the anticipated population growth throughout their respective service areas according to ABAG Plan Bay Area 2040 projections. In addition, the General Plan area is located in urbanized parts of both the CCWD and EBMUD service areas. As discussed under Impact UTIL-2, there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve the 2040 General Plan and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. In compliance with the California Fire Code, Part 9 of the California Building Standards Code (CBC), development facilitated under both plans would follow standards for fire safety such as fire flow requirements for buildings, fire hydrant location, and distribution criteria.

Furthermore, CCWD is in the process of updating its Treated Water Master Plan, which utilizes information from cities and the County General Plans for land use to develop future demand projections to identify improvements to the system needed to meet growth. The update to general plans will require a review by CCWD to determine if modifications or additional improvements to the system are necessary to support development in the proposed plan. With implementation of the above policies, sufficient water supply and WTP capacity would be maintained. As such, new or expanded water facilities are not anticipated to be required due to operational demand.

In addition, the 2040 General Plan contains the following goals and policies that would ensure adequate utility capacity and infrastructure:

Goal PFS-1 Ensure adequate water supply to existing and future development.

Policy PFS-1.2 Infrastructure Maintenance. Collaborate with water providers in their efforts to maintain wastewater conveyance, treatment, and disposal infrastructure in good working conditions within the city.

Policy PFS-1.5 Water Services Requirement. Ensure that water services for new developments does not negatively affect service to existing uses.

Policy PFS-1.6 Water Provider Coordination. Coordinate with water providers to ensure that new proposed development can be adequately served by the water supply system prior to approving the development.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1609 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-19
However, even with implementation of the aforementioned policies, there could be potential need for future water pipeline upsizing and infrastructure connections. Since significant and unavoidable construction impacts associated with air quality, historic resources, paleontological resources, and noise were determined in Sections 3.2, Air Quality, 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, 3.5, Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources, and 3.10, Noise, respectively, operational impacts related to potential need for new or expanded water supply utility infrastructure and facilities would be considered significant and unavoidable. Wastewater
Implementation of the proposed plan could have a significant impact if the wastewater treatment provider would not have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed new land uses in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

Growth and development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would create additional demand for wastewater treatment in Pleasant Hill. However, development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would occur within the urbanized areas of the city where existing wastewater infrastructure is present. Similar to water infrastructure, increased density could require upgraded wastewater pipelines or pumps. Development facilitated by the General Plan is projected to result in approximately 19,216 net new primary and accessory dwelling residential units in Pleasant Hill that in turn would result in approximately 46,119 new residents by the year 2040. As discussed under Impact UTIL-3, there would be adequate capacity to serve the 2040 General Plan’s wastewater demand.

Development facilitated under the 2040 General Plan would undergo review by Central San to ensure that development does not encroach on easements for sewer pipes, and applicants would be responsible for the payment of standard sewer connection fees, as necessary. 30 In addition, the
following 2040 General Plan goals and policies would ensure new development is connected to the existing sanitary sewer system and that wastewater service is adequate.

Goal PFS-1 Ensure adequate water supply to existing and future development.

Policy PFS-1.5 Water Services Requirement. Ensure that water services for new developments does not negatively affect service to existing uses.

Goal PFS-2 Ensure that adequate wastewater facilities and services are available to meet the needs of existing and future development.

Policy PFS-2.1 Infrastructure Maintenance. Collaborate with Central San in their efforts to maintain wastewater conveyance, treatment, and disposal infrastructure in good working conditions within the city.

Policy PFS-2.2 New Development. Coordinate the review of development proposals with Central San to ensure that new development can be adequately served. 30 Pleasant Hill, City of. 2022. Planning Resource Links – Contra Costa County Sanitation District. https://www.pleasanthillca.org/153/Planning-Resource-Links. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1610 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-20
Policy PSF-2.3 Wastewater Services Requirement. Ensure that wastewater services for new development does not negatively affect service to existing uses.

Public Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Element Implementation Programs Program B Capital Improvements Program. When updating the Capital Improvements Program, identify and include the following:
 Projects that could also support green infrastructure improvements.  Street improvements consistent with emergency vehicle access standards.  City-sponsored projects necessary to maintain or improve levels of performance.

However, even with implementation of the aforementioned policies, there could be potential need for future wastewater pipeline upsizing and infrastructure connections. Since significant and unavoidable construction impacts associated with air quality, historic resources, paleontological resources, and noise were determined in Sections 3.2, Air Quality, 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, 3.5, Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources, and 3.10, Noise, respectively, operational impacts related to potential need for new or expanded wastewater utility infrastructure and facilities would be considered significant and unavoidable.

STORMWATER
As described in Impact HYD-1 in Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would reduce the extent of impervious surfaces within the General Plan area, which could in turn reduce stormwater runoff that enters the City’s municipal storm drain system. In addition, because the 2040 General Plan is focused on infill development, the conversion of open space and permeable surfaces to impervious surfaces would be minimized. Furthermore, the amount of impervious surfaces would be reduced through implementation of Best Management Practices, including Low Impact Development (LID) approaches, aimed at reducing stormwater runoff to ensure downstream storm drain capacity is not exceeded. Therefore, stormwater generated by development facilitated by the proposed plan would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage and storage systems.

In addition, the 2040 General Plan contains the following goals and policies that would ensure adequate stormwater capacity and infrastructure:

Policy ENV-2.1 Drainage System Maintenance. Maintain and upgrade the city drainage system, including regularly clearing drainage systems of debris build up that exacerbates flood impacts.

Policy ENV-2.2 Drainage Improvements. Cooperate with regional agencies to complete regional storm drainage improvements.

Goal PFS-3 Provide a resilient, sustainable stormwater management system that reduces runoff volume and minimizes flood potential from existing and future development.

Policy PFS-3.1 NPDES Permit Activities. Implement NPDES permit activities in compliance with State and Federal law to prevent stormwater pollution.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1611 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-21
Policy PFS-3.2 Drainage Facility Maintenance. Collaborate with property owners, the Flood Control District to regularly maintain and provide funding for all drainage facilities to ensure that they continue operating at full carrying capacity.

Policy PFS-3.3 Green Infrastructure. Require new developments to install green infrastructure as required by the permit conditions of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as part of their natural stormwater drainage systems, including but not limited to pervious pavement, infiltration basins, raingardens, green roofs, rainwater harvesting systems, and other types of low impact development (LID).

Policy PFS-3.4 Retrofit for Green Infrastructure. Encourage the retrofit of existing development to include sustainable infrastructure and green building practices.

With implementation of the policies mentioned above and LID techniques, sufficient stormwater collection would be maintained. As such, new or expanded facilities are not anticipated to be required due to operational demand. Therefore, 2040 General Plan operational impacts related to adequacy, capacity, and need for new stormwater infrastructure facilities as a result of stormwater generation would be less than significant.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
At operation, the 2040 General Plan would increase demand for internet and telephone services provided by local telecommunications providers. The library, park district, and future residents would coordinate with telecommunication providers to provide service. The plan area is located in an urbanized area of Pleasant Hill where existing telecommunications providers already offer internet and telephone services. As such, at operation the proposed plan would not require the relocation or expansion of telecommunications infrastructure, due to local telecommunications providers continuing to provide adequate telecommunications capacity and access.

In addition, the 2040 General Plan contains the following goals and policies that would ensure adequate telecommunication capacity and infrastructure:

Goal PFS-5 Provide for the current and future energy and telecommunications needs of Pleasant Hill.

Policy PFS-5.1 Provision of Utilities. Work with public, quasi-public, and private utility providers as practicable to provide adequate levels of service to city residents.

Policy PFS-5.2 Coordination with Utility Providers. Coordinate with energy providers in the siting and design of gas and electric facilities to minimize environmental, aesthetic, and safety impacts.

Policy PFS-5.3 Co-Location of Telecommunication Facilities. Encourage compatible colocation of telecommunication facilities and work with service providers to site telecommunications facilities on City-owned property or public rights-ofway.

Policy PFS-5.4 Utility Undergrounding. Require the undergrounding of local-serving utilities in areas of the city undergoing development or significant construction.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1612 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-22
Policy PFS-5.5 Telecommunication Technologies. Support the implementation of telecommunication technologies to attract new businesses and meet the changing communication needs of city residents and businesses.

Policy PFS-5.6 Fiber Optic Cable Access. Explore opportunities to expand the city's fiber optic infrastructure.

Policy PFS-5.7 Residential Electric Utility Use. Encourage the use of electric appliances and utility hook-ups in all new residential development.

With implementation of the policies mentioned above, sufficient telecommunications access would be maintained. As such, new or expanded facilities are not anticipated to be required due to operational demand. Therefore, 2040 General Plan operational impacts related to access, capacity, and need for new telecommunications infrastructure facilities as a result of telecommunications demand would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-1: ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT A NEW GENERAL PLAN POLICY TO REDUCE CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS (SEE SECTION 3.2,

AIR QUALITY, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
MITIGATION MEASURE AQ-3: ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT A NEW GENERAL PLAN POLICY TO CONDUCT

AND IMPLEMENT CONSTRUCTION HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS (SEE SECTION 3.2, AIR QUALITY, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT) MITIGATION MEASURE CR-1: REVISE GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM M TO INCLUDE

PREPARATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES EVALUATION PRIOR TO APPROVAL FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING BUILDINGS 45 YEARS OR

OLDER AND IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 3.4, CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL

RESOURCES, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
MITIGATION MEASURE CR-2: REVISED GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM M TO INCLUDE

PREPARATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT PRIOR

TO PROJECT APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 3.10, NOISE, FOR

FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
MITIGATION MEASURE CR-3: REVISE GENERAL PLAN GOAL ENV-5 TO INCLUDE A POLICY TO STOP

WORK IN THE EVENT OF UNANTICIPATED CULTURAL RESOURCES
DISCOVERIES DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 3.10, NOISE,

FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
MITIGATION MEASURE CR-4: REVISE GENERAL PLAN GOAL ENV-5 TO INCLUDE A POLICY TO

SUSPEND WORK AROUND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES IDENTIFIED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 3.4, CULTURAL AND TRIBAL

CULTURAL RESOURCES, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
MITIGATION MEASURE GEO-1: ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT A NEW GENERAL PLAN POLICY TO PROTECT PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES (SEE SECTION 3.5, GEOLOGY, SOILS,

AND MINERAL RESOURCES, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1613 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-23
MITIGATION MEASURE NOI-1: ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT A NEW GENERAL PLAN POLICY TO

IMPLEMENT CONSTRUCTION NOISE REDUCTION MEASURES (SEE
SECTION 3.10, NOISE, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
MITIGATION MEASURE NOI-2: ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT A NEW GENERAL PLAN POLICY TO

IMPLEMENT A CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION CONTROL PLAN (SEE
SECTION 3.10, NOISE, FOR FULL MITIGATION MEASURE TEXT)
Level of Significance
Significant and unavoidable
Water Supply Availability
Significance Criterion b: Would the proposed plan have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Impact UTL-2 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN WOULD INCREASE DEMAND FOR WATER SUPPLY. HOWEVER, WITH ADHERENCE TO THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES, WATER SUPPLIES WOULD BE ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Construction
While construction under the 2040 General Plan could necessitate the occasional use of minimal, limited quantity of water for dust control, mixing concrete, and washing equipment and vehicles, impacts related to water supplies are primarily limited to operational impacts. Therefore, 2040 General Plan construction impacts related to need for new water supply as a result of water demand would be less than significant.

Operation
The UWMPs for both CCWD and EBMUD determined there are sufficient water supplies to accommodate anticipated regional population growth throughout their service areas according to the ABAG Plan Bay Area 2040 projections.31,32 Similarly, the UWMPs for the plan area assess water supply reliability for planned growth based upon ABAG 2040 projections and determined that sufficient water supply is available under normal-year, single-dry-year, but may have supply shortfalls in the later years of multiple-dry-year conditions.33,34 However, as discussed in Section 3.9, Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing, development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan could result in an increase in population that would exceed such ABAG population forecasts by 122 percent by 2040. As such, the proposed plan could result in insufficient water supplies to serve the proposed plan buildout in 2040.
31 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Table 1-1, CCWD Service Area Population. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. (accessed December 2022). 32 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Table 1-3, Population Projections. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. (accessed December 2022). 33 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Table 1-4, Projected Water Supply. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. (accessed December 2022). 34 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Table W-3, Supply & Demand Assessment, 2020- 2050. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. (accessed December 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1614 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-24
Both the CCWD and EBMUD UWMPs include measures to implement during periods of water shortages. The CCWD UWMP includes a Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) that outlines actions CCWD would take for managing water during water supply shortage conditions. These options have been developed based on CCWD’s previous experience with short-term demand management, including the recent droughts, and in consideration of long-term conservation goals.

Similarly, the EBMUD WSCP includes existing and planned efforts to support meeting long-term water conservation planning goals to the year 2050. It presents a phased implementation of conservation measures based on threshold water production and customer demand levels designed to achieve a cumulative 70 million gallons per day (MGD) of water savings by 2050.35 Operation of net new residential and non-residential land use built out under the 2040 General Plan would increase the demand for water for both CCWD and EBMUD. As discussed within Section 2, Project Description, maximum buildout of the 2040 General Plan represents development within city limits. As shown in Figure 3.13-2, there are only two water service providers within City Limits, CCWD and EBMUD, with CCWD being the primary service provider to a majority of Pleasant Hill.

Therefore, the analysis herein conservatively evaluates the proposed plan’s impacts solely on CCWD water supply.
36 The CCWD 2020 UWMP sets forth 142 gallons per capita daily (gpcd) as the TWSA average water consumption rate. As discussed within Section 3.9, Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing, at maximum buildout the 2040 General Plan could facilitate the addition of approximately 46,119 net new residents in Pleasant Hill from 2022 to 2040. Multiplying the 145 gcpd by approximately 46,119 persons yields a daily water consumption value of 6,687,255 gallons which equates to 7,491 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water demand for the project.

Based on the population projections presented above and CCWD existing and planned conservation measures, the water demand projections for the TWSA and total UWMP Service Area through 2045 are shown in Table 3.13-2. As shown therein, total demand for the TWSA and UWMP Service Area through the year 2040 is approximately 40,100 AFY and 171,600 AFY, respectively. The 2040 General Plan would account for roughly 7,491 AFY or 18 percent of the total TWSA total demand in 2040. Furthermore, buildout of the 2040 General Plan would account for approximately four percent of the total UWMP Service Area demand in 2040.
35 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2020. Water Shortage Contingency Plan 2020. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan. (accessed November 2022). 36 This approach is conservative, as the other water service provider (EBMUD) covering a portion of Pleasant Hill would also be available to provide water supply within Pleasant Hill.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1615 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-25
Figure 3.13-2 Water Districts in Proposed Buildout Area

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1616 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-26
Table 3.13-2 CCWD Current and Projected Water Demand
Year 2020 20252 20302 20352 20402 20452
Total TWSA
Demand1 (AFY)
32,600 36,400 37,400 38,800 40,100 40,900
Total UWMP
Service Area
Demand (AFY)
126,320 147,400 157,300 165,000 171,600 175,900
AFY = acre-feet per year
1 TWSA demands include treated water distribution system losses. 2 Future demand projections are based on maximum dry-year demands not impacted by drought-related water shortage or economic conditions. Additionally, projected demands consider anticipated water use efficiency and conservation measures which result in reduced demands.

Source: CCWD 202037
The CCWD 2020 UWMP also anticipates the existing and planned sources of water available in fiveyear increments though the General Plan planning horizon year 2040, as shown in Table 3.13-3, as well as the projected availability of these water supplies in average, single-dry, and multiple-dry water year conditions. An average water year is a year that most closely represents the average water supply available to the agency. A single-dry year is defined as the year that represents the lowest water supply available to the agency. A multiple-dry year period is defined as the period that represents the lowest average water supply availability for five consecutive dry years.

Table 3.13-3 CCWD Projected Water Supply Demand for 2040 Water Year Type CVP2 (AFY) Total Planned Supply (AFY)
Average 185,250 242,200
Single-Dry 136,500 194,350
Multi-Dry Year 1 146,250 197,100
Multi-Dry Year 3 117,000 166,570
Multi-Dry Year 5 97,500 147,170
AFY = acre-feet per year
1 Average (Normal) represents availability of water supply in wet, above normal, below normal and normal years. Single-Dry Year represents availability of water supply in dry and critically dry years. Multiple-Dry Year sequence represents a five-year drought such as 1929-1933 conditions.
2 Central Valley Project contract which provides for a maximum delivery of 195,000 AFY of CVP supply.

Source: CCWD 202038
As shown above in Table 3.13-3, CCWD does not anticipate supply deficits in normal years or singledry years throughout the planning horizon but may have supply shortfalls in future years of up to 14 percent of demand in the later years of a multi-dry year conditions. Potential supply shortfalls experienced during dry year conditions would be met through a combination of a short-term conservation program and/or short-term water purchases, consistent with the District’s Future Water Supply Study.
39 37 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Table 1-3, Current and Projected Water Demand. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. (accessed December 2022). 38 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Table 1-4, Projected Water Supply. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. (accessed December 2022). 39 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Water Supply Reliability Assessment. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. (accessed December 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1617 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-27
As shown Table 3.13-2 and Table 3.13-3, water supply associated with the 2040 General Plan would be met by CCWD supply in average and single-dry years but could result in additional demand on CCWD water supply in multi-dry year conditions. However, CCWD anticipates meeting future demands through continued use of its Central Valley Project (CVP) contract, its own water rights, and balanced investments in conservation, recycled water, and water transfers. The CVP is CCWD’s primary water source obtained under contract that provides for a maximum delivery of 195,000 AFY of CVP supply.

Furthermore, water supply shortfalls would be met by CCWD water conservation measures as outlined in the CCWD WSCP, which includes conservation surveys, rebate incentives, and education and outreach.
40 Within these broad categories, the programs and services are further tailored for residential, commercial, industrial, and large landscape water uses. CCWD continually evaluates its existing and potential conservation programs and services to determine the best combination of programs that meet criteria such as water savings potential, certainty of water savings, customer receptivity, market potential, and cost-effectiveness.

In addition to CCWD WSCP conservation measures, the 2040 General Plan includes the following goals and policies that would help reduce impacts on water supplies and encourage the conservation of water:

Goal HA-4 Minimize the effects of drought by creating an emphasis of routine water conservation.

Policy HS-4.1 Municipal Water Conservation. Continue to identify opportunities to upgrade City facilities with water-conserving appliances and using reclaimed water for irrigation, landscaping, and other allowable uses.

Policy HS-4.2 Residential Water Conservation. Implement and maintain cost-effective, citywide water conservation and efficiency programs for all customers through education, rebates, assistance programs, and building requirements.

Policy HS-4.3 Water Conservation Measures. Reduce the amount of water used by development by requiring compliance with adopted water conservation measures.

Goal ENV-1.3 Provide an adequate water supply for residential, business, and other uses needed to support the existing and projected city population.

Policy ENV-1.3 Commercial and Business Water Conservation. Require new or remodeled commercial and industrial development to make changes that conserve water, to the extent feasible. This could include utilizing efficient plumbing fixtures, installing drought-tolerant and water-wise landscaping, and harvesting rainwater for irrigation.

Policy ENV-1.4 Municipal Water Conservation. Require, where feasible, that City facilities install efficient plumbing fixtures in new construction or renovations, replacing inefficient plumbing fixtures, and installing drought-tolerant and water-wise landscaping to conserve water.
40 Contra Costa Water District (CCWD). 2020. Urban Water Management Plan – Water Shortage Contingency Planning. https://www.ccwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/9851/2020-Urban-Water-Management-Plan-PDF. (accessed December 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1618 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-28
Policy ENV-1.5 Water Conservation in Public Facilities. During construction or renovation of public facilities, institute water conservation measures such as hot-ondemand water faucets, low flush toilets, and low water using appliances.

Thus, while the development facilitated by the proposed plan would result in additional population beyond the projected population within Plan Bay Area 2040 and the CCWD and EBMUD UWMPs, current water supplies and adherence to the 2040 General Plan policies would be adequate to meet 2040 General Plan per capita water demand. Furthermore, the proposed General Plan would account for 18 percent of the total TWSA demand and 4 percent of the total CCWD UWMP Service Area water demand in the year 2040 which is not a significant demand on the service system. Water supply for the 2040 General Plan would be met in average and single-dry years but could result in shortfalls in multi-dry year conditions. Additional demand would be met by the CCWD CVP and water conservation measures as outlined in CCWD WSCP which includes conservation surveys, rebate incentives, and education and outreach.
41 Therefore, with implementation of the
aforementioned policies and requirement for future development of certain minimum size to prepare water supply assessments, 2040 General Plan impacts related to sufficient water supplies would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant without mitigation
Wastewater Treatment Capacity
Significance Criterion c: Would the proposed plan 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?
Impact UTL-3 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTED BY THE PROPOSED PLAN WOULD INCREASE DEMAND FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT. HOWEVER, THE EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HAS SUFFICIENT CAPACITY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, AND THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN CONTAINS POLICIES TO ENSURE TREATMENT IS ADEQUATE. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Construction
Impacts related to adequate wastewater treatment capacity are limited to operational impacts. No respective construction impacts would occur.
41 In addition, future plans and projects facilitated by the 2040 General Plan that meet certain criteria under Senate Bill 610 will be required to prepare a project-level water supply assessment, which identifies and verifies water supply availability under normal water year conditions, single dry year conditions, and multiple dry year conditions.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1619 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-29
Operation
Implementation of the proposed plan could have a significant impact if the wastewater treatment provider would not have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed new land uses in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

Growth and development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would create additional demand for wastewater treatment in Pleasant Hill. As discussed within Section 3.9, Land Use/Planning and Population/Housing, this additional housing, coupled with ongoing and planned development, would lead to a population growth of approximately 46,119 new residents by 2040. Under full buildout of the General Plan, this equates to an approximately 80,145 new residents by the year 2040. Because development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would occur within the urbanized areas of the City, existing wastewater infrastructure exists.

Wastewater collected within Pleasant Hill is treated at the Central San WWTP, which has a treatment capacity of 54 million gpd and treats an average of 35.6 million gallons of wastewater per day.42 On average, the WWTP processes approximately 32 million gallons of wastewater each day during the dry season and can see peak flows as high as an estimated 230 million gallons per day during an extreme winter storm. According to the 2020 EBMUD UWMP, Central San collected and treated 35 mgd of wastewater in 2020 and this number is expected to increase to 41.8 mgd by 2045.43 Both the 2020 wastewater levels, as well as the 2045 projects water levels are within the treatment plant’s overall capacity of 54 mgd. Central San has developed the following wastewater loading criteria for different types of land uses:
44  180 gallons per dwelling unit per day (gpd) for single family dwelling units  105 gpd for multiple family dwelling units
Using the unit loading criteria for single family and multiple family dwelling units, development facilitated by the General Plan would generate approximately 1,287,000 gpd and 1,266,930 gpd of wastewater, respectively. The proposed plan would result in approximately 2,553,930 gpd or approximately 2.1 mgd, which would constitute approximately 11 percent of the remaining capacity (19 mgd)45 of the wastewater treatment plant.46 Furthermore, in 2045 the projected wastewater demand, including the General Plan would be 42.047, which would be within the capacity of the treatment plan. Therefore, Central San’s treatment plant would have sufficient capacity to accommodate wastewater generated by the General Plan.

Additionally, Central San has prepared and is implementing a 10-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) which serves to expand, upgrade, and replace its treatment plant and collection system.

Central San has included a Collection System Program which aims to renovate aging sewers and to serve new development in Central San’s service area. Specific near-term and long-term goals include addressing capacity needs by upsizing sewers to increase capacity, improving the reliability of Central San’s pumping stations, and implementing projects to address renovation needs. Projects 42 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2022. Central San Treatment Plant. https://www.centralsan.org/treatment-plant. (accessed November 2022).
43 East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). 2021. Urban Water Management Plan 2020. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/urban-water-management-plan/. (accessed November 2022). 44 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2017. Comprehensive Wastewater Master Plan Technical Executive Summary. https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/cwmp_technical_executive_summary.pdf?1510867241. (accessed November 2022).
45 19 mgd = 54 mgd (capacity) – 35 mgd (wastewater treatment in 2020). 46 11 percent = [2.1 mgd (General Plan wastewater demand) / 19 mgd (remaining capacity in 2020)] * 100 percent 47 42.0 mgd = 41.8 mgd (projected wastewater demand in 2045) + 0.2 mgd (Housing Element wastewater demand)

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1620 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-30
under the Collection System Program would reduce the likelihood of sewage overflows during dry and wet weather.48Implementation of Central San’s 10-year CIP and the existing WWTP’s capacity would ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity for future development under the proposed plan. Therefore, 2040 General Plan operational impacts related to sufficient water treatment capacity would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant without mitigation
Landfill Capacity and Solid Waste Reduction Regulations Consistency Significance Criterion d: Would the proposed plan generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Significance Criterion e: Would the proposed plan comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Impact UTL-4 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED UNDER THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN WOULD INCREASE THE VOLUME OF SOLID WASTE GENERATED IN PLEASANT HILL. HOWEVER, EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SERVES THE CITY, AS WELL AS POLICIES WITHIN THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN, WOULD ENSURE THAT THE CITY HAS

ADEQUATE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT THE INCREASE IN SOLID WASTE AND COMPLY WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL MANAGEMENT REDUCTION REGULATIONS. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Construction
Construction facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would involve the development of existing buildings, surface parking lots, and landscaping. This would result in the generation of solid waste from demolition and on-site construction activities. Future projects developed under the proposed plan that would entail construction and generate solid waste would subject to Pleasant Hill Municipal Code Chapter 14.40 to ensure that construction-generated solid waste is not in excess of State or local standards or the capacity of local landfills, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Additionally, the proposed General Plan includes Policy PFS-4.3 which requires the recycling and reuse of building materials during demolition and construction.

Therefore, construction impacts related to landfill capacity and solid waste reduction goals consistency would be less than significant.

Operation
Development facilitated by the proposed plan could result in the addition of up to 46,119 new residents and 19,216 residential units throughout Pleasant Hill by the year 2040. Based on a solid 48 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San). 2015. FY 2015-2016 Capital Improvement Budget and Ten-Year Plan. https://www.centralsan.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/2015_16_cib.pdf?1510722971 (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1621 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-31
waste generation rate of 5.31 pounds per dwelling unit per year, 49 the proposed plan would
generate an estimated 102,037 pounds per day or about 37 million pounds per year (or 18,500 tons per year). According to CalRecycle, the Keller Canyon Landfill has a maximum throughput of approximately 3,500 tons per day and anticipated closure date of December 31, 2050. 50 The
proposed plan would yield an annual solid waste generation of approximately 102,037 pounds per day, which would account for approximately 1.4 percent of the throughput of the Keller Canyon Landfill. In addition to the Keller Canyon Landfill, solid waste could also be transferred to the Acme Landfill which has a remaining capacity of approximately 506,590 cubic yards and could divert a portion of the solid waste from the plan area.51 Therefore, development facilitated by the 2040 General Plan would not generate solid waste in excess of the capacity of local solid waste infrastructure.

In addition, the 2040 General Plan contains the following goal and associated policies to address solid waste generation and disposal within Pleasant Hill.

Goal PFS-4 Continue and improve upon efforts to divert waste from landfills.

Policy PFS-4.1 Sustainable Solid Waste and Recycling Services. Work with contract service provider to advance their sustainability initiatives to increase recovery of key materials and development of regenerative landfills.

Policy PFS-4.2 Waste Reduction Education. Collaborate and partner with local organizations to provide waste reduction education programs to residents and businesses.

Policy PFS-4.3 Recycle and Reuse Building Materials. Require the recycling and reuse of building materials during demolition and construction including roadway projects.

Development facilitated by the proposed plan would be required to comply with these policies, including paying a fair share for solid waste services and achieving greater diversion rates than required by AB 939. Pursuant to AB 939 the City must divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills.

Local infrastructure and Republic Services would have the capacity to accommodate and collect solid waste generated by the proposed plan. Development facilitated by the proposed plan would also be required to demonstrate compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations related to management and reduction of solid waste, including related to recycling and composting (e.g., California Senate Bill 1383). Therefore, the 2040 General Plan impact related to local solid waste infrastructure capacity and solid waste management and reduction regulations consistency would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant without mitigation
49 CalRecycle. 2019. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates (accessed November 2022) 50 50 CalRecycle. 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Keller Canyon Landfill (07-AA-0032). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4407?siteID=228. (accessed November 2022). 51 CalRecycle. 2019 SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details Acme Landfill (07-AA-0002). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4396?siteID=217. (accessed November 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1622 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-32

3.13.5 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope of the cumulative utilities and service systems analysis is the CCWD, EBMUD, Central San, Pleasant Hill Public Works, and Republic Services service areas. Because of differences in the nature of the utility and service system topical areas, they are discussed separately. The cumulative analysis considers the nearby past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future plans and projects listed in Table 3-1 (refer to Chapter 3, Environmental Impact Analysis) located in Lafayette, Martinez, Clayton, Danville, Orinda, Pittsburg, Moraga, and unincorporated Contra Costa County, and Plan Bay Area 2050.

Water Supply Infrastructure and Facilities
CCWD and EBMUD provide potable water to residents and businesses within the Contra Costa and the East Bay, including Pleasant Hill. Both CCWD and EBMUD considered the existing capacity and future demand for capacity to determine needed updates to water facilities. In the course of preparing the UWMP, both providers estimated water demand of future development in the service area and forecast the needed facility upgrades. The forecast included supply facility upgrades needed to accommodate growth in the service area, including Pleasant Hill. The CCWD and EBMUD prepared UWMPs that considered the buildout potential across the service area. The UWMPs determined that the CCWD and EBMUD would be able to provide adequate water supplies to the City during normal years and single dry years but would see shortfalls during multiple dry years which would be offset through planned water supply purchases. However, while the development facilitated by the proposed plan would result in additional population beyond the projected population within Plan Bay Area 2040, adherence to the General Plan policies would reduce per capita water use. In addition, future developments that meet certain criteria under Senate Bill 610 will be required to prepare a project-level water supply assessment, which identifies and verifies water supply availability under normal water year conditions, single dry year conditions, and multiple dry year conditions. Furthermore, cumulative plans and projects listed in Table 3-1 would be required to comply with provisions of the respective municipal codes and California Green Building Code related to water conservation. However, as discussed above, there is potential that infrastructure upgrades may be required to accommodate future growth. Therefore, the cumulative impacts related to water supply infrastructure expansion and construction would be significant and unavoidable.

Wastewater Infrastructure and Facilities
Central San provides wastewater collection and treatment services for the residents and business in Pleasant Hill. Central San recently updated its Sewer System Management Plan which, the purpose of which is to reduce sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) in the City’s sanitary sewer collection system and to enhance compliance with the applicable permits, laws, and regulations as related to sanitary sewer overflows. The plan includes treatment facility upgrades needed to accommodate growth in the service area and maintain compliance with applicable regulatory standards for wastewater treatment and discharge. Cumulative plans and projects would generate volumes of wastewater.

The Cities of Lafayette, Martinez, Clayton, Danville, Orinda, Pittsburg, Moraga, and unincorporated Contra Costa County anticipate development in the respective cities and determined that capacity would exist to service the demand for wastewater treatment facilities. . However, as discussed above, there is potential that infrastructure upgrades may be required to accommodate future growth. Therefore, the cumulative impacts related to wastewater infrastructure expansion and construction would be significant and unavoidable.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1623 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Environmental Impact Analysis
Utilities and Service Systems
Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.13-33
Stormwater Infrastructure and Facilities
Cumulative plans and projects predominantly consist of residential and commercial uses. The cumulative plans and projects would be located in urban areas that would be served by existing municipal storm drainage systems. Consistent with measures in the Lafayette, Martinez, Clayton, Danville, Orinda, Pittsburg, Moraga, and Contra Costa County Municipal Codes, development in the cities would incorporate a stormwater control plan and stormwater collection systems into the development that would in turn reduce the volume and velocity of stormwater runoff that cumulative development would generate. Therefore, the cumulative impact related to stormwater infrastructure and facilities would be less than significant.

Solid Waste Facilities
Keller Canyon and Acme Landfills operate solid waste landfills and oversee regional waste diversion programs as well as solid waste and recycling collection services. Keller Canyon anticipates it would be able to absorb future growth. Cumulative plans and projects listed consist predominantly of residential and commercial uses. However, as with the surrounding areas, new cumulative development (residential and non-residential) would increase demand on solid waste facilities to receive, process, and store solid waste. The Keller Canyon Landfill has a maximum throughput of approximately 3,500 tons per day and anticipated closure date of December 31, 2050. The anticipated waste volume of development in the plan area represents approximately 1.4 percent of the throughput of the Keller Canyon Landfill. Existing solid waste facilities provide sufficient capacity to serve development anticipated in the Cities of Lafayette, Martinez, Clayton, Danville, Orinda, Pittsburg, Moraga, and unincorporated Contra Costa County as well as existing, planned, and probable future land uses in the respective cities for the foreseeable future. Therefore, the cumulative impact related to solid waste facilities would be less than significant.

Overall Level of Cumulative Significance
Less than significant

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1624 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan

3.13-34
This page intentionally left blank.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1625 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Other CEQA Sections
Draft Environmental Impact Report 4-1
4 Other CEQA Sections
This chapter discusses growth-inducing impacts and irreversible environmental impacts that would be caused by the proposed plan.

4.1 Growth Inducing Impacts
There are two types of growth-inducing impacts that a plan or project may have: direct and indirect.

To assess the potential for growth-inducing impacts, the proposed plan’s characteristics that may encourage and facilitate activities that individually or cumulatively may affect the environment must be evaluated. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires a discussion of a proposed plan or project’s potential to foster economic or population growth, including ways in which a plan could remove an obstacle to growth. Growth does not necessarily create significant physical changes to the environment. However, depending upon the type, magnitude, and location of growth, it can result in significant adverse environmental effects. The CEQA Guidelines, as interpreted by the City, state that a significant growth-inducing impact may result if the proposed plan would:
 Induce substantial population growth in an area (for example, by proposing or facilitating new residences or employment-generating uses beyond the land use density/intensity envisioned in the general plan);
 Substantially alter the planned location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the population of an area; or
 Include extensions of roads or other infrastructure not assumed in the general plan or adopted capital improvements project list, when such infrastructure exceeds the needs of a project and could accommodate unplanned future development.

Direct growth-inducing impacts occur when the implementation of a plan or project imposes new burdens on a community by directly inducing population growth, or by leading to the construction of additional developments in the same area. Also included in this category are plans or projects that remove physical obstacles to population growth (such as a new road into an undeveloped area or a wastewater treatment plant with excess capacity that could allow additional development in the service area). Construction of these types of infrastructure cannot be considered isolated from the development they facilitate and serve. Plans or projects that physically remove obstacles to growth, or projects that indirectly induce growth, may provide a catalyst for future unrelated development in an area such as a new residential community that requires additional commercial uses to support residents.

4.1.1 Population and Employment Growth
As discussed in Section 3.9, Land Use/Planning and Population/Housing, the buildout anticipated under the 2040 General Plan could accommodate an estimated 46,119 new residents and 19,216 new dwelling units in Pleasant Hill. With the estimated growth under the 2040 General Plan, Pleasant Hill would have a 2040 population of 80,145. Additionally, ABAG estimates that Pleasant Hill would have an additional 2,200 jobs by 2040 for a total of 19,800 within the City. Note that growth assumptions within this EIR are conservative and unlikely to come to complete fruition.

Additionally, future ABAG forecasts may provide more realistic growth assumptions, which would be lower than the growth presented here.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1626 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
4-2
It is anticipated that buildout under the proposed plan would directly support the population growth and subsequent housing needs within Pleasant Hill’s projected growth estimates. Since much of Pleasant Hill is currently developed and used for residential, commercial, and various other uses, implementation of the proposed plan would largely entail the development of vacant and underutilized parcels throughout Pleasant Hill. As discussed under Impact LU-1 and LU-2, the proposed plan aims to intensify and densify development within the 2040 General Plan area to accommodate anticipated population growth and housing needs within Pleasant Hill. Proposed 2040 General Plan land use and planning policies aim to provide guidance for orderly development while balancing the land use needs for housing, residential and commercial services, civic needs, and jobs.

It is the specific purpose of the proposed plan to guide growth and development in Pleasant Hill such that infill development would be prioritized, and open space areas would be preserved and enhanced. Therefore, by its nature, the proposed plan is intended to reduce the potential for uncontrolled growth and associated environmental impacts. For the reasons discussed above, implementation of the proposed plan would not lead to direct or indirect growth impacts beyond what is anticipated and planned for by Pleasant Hill.

4.1.2 Removal of Obstacles to Growth
As discussed under Impact LU-1 and LU-2 in Section 3.9, Land Use/Planning and Population/Housing, much of Pleasant Hill is developed, and the proposed plan encourages infill development to meet Pleasant Hill’s anticipated population and employment growth and housing needs. Although development of some vacant land within Pleasant Hill would require new utility connections, new development would occur where existing roads, water, parking lots, and sewer and other utilities are in place and in a manner that minimizes the impact of development on existing infrastructure and services. Major infrastructure extensions are not envisioned due to the level of existing development within Pleasant Hill, and improvements would be primarily limited to the replacement and/or upgrade of aging facilities and enhancement of existing infrastructure as needed on a future project-by-project basis. All new development envisioned as part of the 2040 General Plan would occur within City limits. Therefore, because new development would use existing facilities and major infrastructure extensions would not occur, the proposed plan would not remove obstacles to unplanned growth within Pleasant Hill.

4.2 Irreversible Environmental Effects
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(c) requires that EIRs evaluating plans and projects involving amendments to public plans, ordinances, or policies contain a discussion of significant irreversible environmental changes. CEQA also requires decision-makers to balance the benefits of a proposed plan or project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve a plan or project. This section addresses the use of non-renewable resources, the commitment of future generations to the proposed development and land use changes, and irreversible impacts associated with the development that would be facilitated by implementation of the 2040 General Plan.

Construction activity associated with planned development accommodated under the proposed plan would include the use of building materials and energy, some of which would be nonrenewable resources. Consumption of these resources would occur with any development in the Bay Area region and are not unique to Pleasant Hill or the proposed plan. The addition of new

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1627 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Other CEQA Sections
Draft Environmental Impact Report 4-3
residential and non-residential development in the Pleasant Hill through 2040 would irreversibly increase local demand for non-renewable energy resources such as petroleum and natural gas.

Increasingly efficient building fixtures and automobile engines, as well as implementation of policies included in the 2040 General Plan, are expected to offset the demand for non-renewable energy to some degree. Growth resulting from implementation of the proposed plan is not anticipated to significantly affect local or regional energy supplies; and project impacts related to energy consumption are further evaluated in Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy.

Growth facilitated by the proposed plan would require an irreversible commitment of City services, water supply, and wastewater treatment. As discussed in Section 3.12, Public Services and Recreation, and Section 3.13, Utilities and Service Systems, impacts to public services and utilities would be remain significant and unavoidable as they relate to construction of schools.

Growth associated with the 2040 General Plan through 2040 would incrementally increase local vehicle miles traveled (VMT), noise levels, and regional air pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As discussed in Section 3.2, Air Quality, and Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy, implementation of the proposed plan policies, regional air pollution programs, and mitigation measures would reduce the air pollutant and GHG emissions associated with individual future development projects; however, air quality pollutants and GHG emissions would not be reduced to below significant thresholds. As discussed in Section 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, implementation of the proposed plan policies, historical resources regulations, and mitigation measures would not be reduced to below significant thresholds.

As discussed in Section 3.10, Noise, implementation of proposed policies and mitigation measures would reduce the noise impacts associated with future growth but not to a less-than-significant level. As discussed in Section 3.12, Transportation, the policies in the proposed plan and mitigation measures would reduce many transportation impacts to a less-than-significant level; however, population growth facilitated by the proposed plan combined with regional population growth would result in additional vehicle trips on area roadways, resulting in significant and unavoidable traffic impacts on several roadways.

4.3 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Per CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Section XVIII, the following mandatory findings of significance analysis is provided.
a. Does the proposed plan have the potential to substantially 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, substantially 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?
The 2040 General Plan would not facilitate development that would eliminate or threaten wildlife habitats. Therefore, as discussed in more detail in Section 3.3, Biological, Agricultural, and Forestry Resources, the 2040 General Plan would result in less-than-significant-with-mitigation impacts related to wildlife habitats. However, the 2040 General Plan could potentially eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, as discussed in more detail in Section 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, the 2040 General Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to cultural resources, specifically historical resources.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1628 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
4-4
b. Does the proposed plan 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)? While the proposed 2040 General Plan policies encourage residents, businesses, and the City to reduce energy, fuel use, water use, VMT, and solid waste generation and the associated GHG emissions, the proposed plan would still result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to VMT and GHG emissions. In addition, as discussed throughout the respective cumulative impacts discussions within this EIR, the 2040 General Plan would also result in significant cumulative impacts for the similar topics. Therefore, the 2040 General Plan would result in an overall significant and unavoidable cumulative impact related to all CEQA topics addressed within this EIR. c. Does the proposed plan have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The 2040 General Plan would result in adverse effects on human beings. As discussed in more detail in Sections 3.2, Air Quality, 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy, 3.7, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire, 3.10, Noise, and 3.13, Transportation, implementation of the 2040 General Plan could result in impacts related to transportation, air quality, GHG emission, noise, and hazards that could, in turn, affect human beings. Therefore, the 2040 General Plan would result in an overall significant and unavoidable impact related to potential for adverse effects on human beings.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1629 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-1
5 EIR Alternatives

5.1 Introduction
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126.6, this chapter contains a comparative impact assessment of alternatives to the 2040 General Plan (proposed plan).

The primary purpose of an alternatives analysis under CEQA is to provide decision-makers and the public with a reasonable range of feasible alternatives to the proposed plan that could attain most of the basic plan’s objectives, while avoiding or reducing any of the plan’s significant adverse environmental effects.

Analysis of three alternatives to the proposed plan is provided for informational purposes and to allow decision-makers to consider the proposed plan in light of hypothetical alternative planning scenarios, thereby promoting CEQA’s purpose as an information disclosure statute. This analysis is guided by the following considerations set forth under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6:
 An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a plan or project;  An EIR should identify alternatives that were considered by the lead agency, but rejected as infeasible during the scoping process;
 Reasons for rejecting an alternative include:
 Failure to meet most of the basic plan or project objectives;  Infeasibility; or
 Inability to avoid significant environmental effects.

5.2 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The implementation of the proposed plan was analyzed for potentially significant impacts related to each of the environmental issues discussed in Sections 3.1 through 3.13. The results of the analysis indicate that the proposed plan would result in the following significant and unavoidable impacts:
 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources: construction-related historical resources  GHG Emissions and Energy: operation-related GHG emissions and consistency with GHG reduction plans
 Hazard, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire: operation-related wildfire exposure risk and emergency response/evacuation plans consistency
 Noise: construction-related noise and operation-related mobile (roadway vehicle) noise  Public Services and Recreation: construction-related new and expanded schools  Transportation: operation-related VMT
 Utilities and Service Systems: construction- and operational-related new and expanded utilities facilities/infrastructure
Mitigation measures (MMs) were identified for construction-related historic resources, noise, and new and expanded schools and utilities facilities/infrastructure impacts and for operational-related GHG emissions/GHG reduction plans consistency, mobile (roadway vehicle) noise, vehicle miles traveled, and wildfire exposure risk impacts; however, the identified mitigation would not reduce

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1630 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-2
the impacts to less than significant. Thus, even though the proposed plan attempts to mitigate its impacts to the greatest extent feasible as required by CEQA, the mitigation is not technically feasible or sufficient or available to reduce impacts from significant and unavoidable.

5.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Plan
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, this EIR presents a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed plan for analysis and evaluation of their comparative merits. These alternatives are considered to cover the range of development alternatives that would meet the basic objectives of the plans while lessening one or more of its significant impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) states that an EIR need not evaluate every conceivable alternative. Information has been provided for each alternative that would allow meaningful comparison with the proposed plan.

The three alternatives to the proposed plan analyzed in this chapter are as follows:
 Alternative 1: Adopted General Plan Buildout (i.e., “No Project”)  Alternative 2: Increased Intensity in Non-western Areas  Alternative 3: 25 Percent Residential Reduction
Table 5-1 shows the alternatives’ components summary; this EIR Alternatives analysis examines the net change from the proposed plan in terms of potential physical environmental impacts. Detailed descriptions of the alternatives are included in the impact analyses for each Alternative in Sections

5.5 through 5.7.

Table 5-1 Alternatives Buildout Projections Summary
Feature Proposed Plan Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Commercial, Neighborhood
Business, and Mixed-use
Square Feet
1,358,792 315,340 1,358,792 1,358,792
Schools
Square Feet
6,444,767 - 6,444,767 6,444,767
Semi-public and Institutional
Square Feet
1,401,063 1,401,063 1,401,063 1,401,063
Office
Square Feet
(-)217,081 146,141 (-)217,081 (-)217,081
Industrial
Square Feet
168,672 168,672 168,672 168,672
Multi-family Residential
Number of Units
12,066 808 12,066 9,050
Single-family Residential
(including 525 ADUs)
Number of Units
7,150 238 7,150 5,363
Additional Population Estimate
(Assumes 2.4 persons per
household1)
46,119 41,3002 46,119 34,591
Sources: 1 California Department of Finance. 2022. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2021-2022. Available: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-citiescounties-and-the-state-2020-2022/ (accessed December 2022) 2 Pleasant Hill, City of. 2003. General Plan 2003. https://www.pleasanthillca.org/DocumentCenter/View/314/Current-GeneralPlan?bidId= (accessed December 2022)

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1631 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-3

5.4 Plan Objectives
As described in Chapter 2, Project Description, the objectives for the 2040 General Plan are as follows:
 Encourage smart and sensitive development. Protect and enhance the community character and existing neighborhoods that define Pleasant Hill by guiding future residential and commercial development to meet the needs of the community and be respectful of the environment;
 Foster economic diversity and sustainability. Promote a diverse local economy that is flexible and adaptable to changes in consumer habits and market trends. Be a business-friendly community that supports businesses that foster new job growth and attracts visitors to the city;  Provide barrier-free mobility. Advance and maintain a circulation network that accommodates alternative modes of travel, provides neighborhood connectivity, and enhances safety;  Provide balanced growth. Focus new development in areas adjacent to major corridors and transit systems while preserving existing neighborhoods and open space resources. Support sustainable development that aligns with current best practices and is compatible with our community;
 Ensure public safety. Providing a safe community through public safety services, resilient infrastructure, public awareness, preparedness, and action plans for both human-caused and natural disasters; and
 Support diverse housing options. Create the conditions necessary to stimulate the diversity of housing options for community members of all ages and incomes.

5.5 Alternative 1: Adopted General Plan Buildout
The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[e][2]) require that the alternatives discussion include an analysis of a ”No Project” Alternative. Pursuant to CEQA, the “No Project” Alternative refers to the analysis of existing conditions and what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the proposed plan was not approved. This is based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure information. The “No Project” Alternative typically will proceed along one of two lines: (1) when a plan or project is a revision of an existing regulatory plan or policy, the “No Project” Alternative will be continuation of the existing plan or policy; or (2) if a plan or project is a development project on identifiable property, the “No Project” Alternative is the circumstance under which a project does not proceed. Thus, in the case of this programmatic EIR for a proposed plan, the “No Project” Alternative would be a No New Plan Alternative that represents the continuation of existing General Plan designations throughout Pleasant Hill. Full buildout under those existing designations is assumed to occur under this alternative. Typical development assumptions are included in the below analysis of this alternative, including compliance with applicable regulations or typical City-required measures.

5.5.1 Description
The Adopted General Plan Buildout Alternative (or Alternative 1) assumes that the current land use and zoning designations would not change from the City’s adopted 2003 General Plan. The 2040 General Plan would not be adopted. Current land uses for residential units and commercial, office, school, industrial, and semi-public/institutional area would remain unchanged under Alternative 1.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1632 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-4
Future buildout would continue to follow the current designations. For purposes of the environmental analysis, it was assumed that the number of persons per household would still be

2.4.1 Based on this, the Pleasant Hill population increase estimate would be 41,300, which represents a relative population decrease of 4,819 compared to the proposed plan (see Table 5.1).

Alternative 1 would not update the Pleasant Hill General Plan. Without the 2040 General Plan, Pleasant Hill would lack a long-term blueprint for development throughout the General Plan area and not meet its current RHNA requirements.

5.5.2 Impact Analysis
Aesthetics
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under to the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. As such, there would be less new sources of light or glare within the General Plan area that could adversely affect daytime or nighttime views. While the existing (2003) Pleasant Hill General Plan does not contain a policy requiring the City to adopt lighting standards intended to maintain ambient lighting levels and minimum glare, individual future projects would be required to mitigate lighting levels as applicable.

There would also be less potential for visual character of the General Plan area to be altered, as development facilitated by the existing General Plan would follow current policies that would prevent this impact. Therefore, Alternative 1 impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.1, Aesthetics). Alternative 1 would lessen aesthetics impacts compared to the proposed plan due to the lower overall potential for light, glare, and visual character alterations within the General Plan area, but not to the extent of reducing the impact significance level. However, this alternative would not meet the plan objectives that focus on smart and sensitive development given that infill development would not be maximized.

Air Quality
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Temporary construction-related air quality impacts from grading and construction and longer-term air quality impacts from building operation (energy usage, maintenance), would be lower than under the proposed plan. While individual future project mitigation could result in construction-related criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions, such projects would be required to mitigate emissions as applicable as well as comply with BAAQMD basic control measures to comply with standard permit conditions. Therefore, Alternative 1 impacts related to air quality would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to air quality would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.2, Air Quality). Alternative 1 would result in lesser levels of criteria pollutant and toxic air contaminant emission generation impacts compared to the proposed plan but not to the extent of reducing the impact significance level. However, this alternative would not meet the plan objectives that focus on smart and sensitive development given that existing land uses within the General Plan 1 California Department of Finance. 2022. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2021-2022. Available: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-countiesand-the-state-2020-2022/

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1633 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-5
area would not be updated with more modern facilities in compliance with latest building codes and, thus, would not promote greater energy efficiency nor maximize infill development.

Biological, Agriculture, and Forestry Resources
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Development changes related to wildlife, habitat, and waters of the United States conservation policies would follow the existing (2003) General Plan guidelines. Similar to the proposed plan, areas under the current General Plan currently developed with residential and non-residential uses likely are not suitable habitat for special-status species, wetlands, agricultural land, and forests. This alternative would follow the current mitigation measures in place to reduce the impact of significance level on biological, agriculture, and forestry resources. Therefore, Alternative 1 biological, agriculture, and forestry resources impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to biological, agriculture, and forestry resources would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.3, Biological, Agriculture, and Forestry Resources).

Alternative 1 would have a similar impact on these resources. However, this alternative would not meet the proposed plan objectives for smart and sensitive development in terms of development construction activities potentially affecting sensitive wildlife species during construction activities.

Lastly, the proposed plan includes new and updated conservation goals, policies and programs, not found in the existing General Plan.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. The Patrick Rogers Farm and buildings 45 years or older are identified as existing cultural resources in the General Plan area (see Section 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources). These and other not-yetidentified historic resources could be altered as part of buildout of the existing (2003) General Plan.

Therefore, even with mitigation identified for the proposed plan, Alternative 1 cultural and tribal resources impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to Cultural and Tribal Resources would be significant and unavoidable even after mitigation (see Section 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources).

Alternative 1 would have reduced cultural resources impacts compared to the proposed plan due to the decrease in buildout potential but not to the extent of reducing the impact significance level.

However, this alternative would not adopt measures to revise the General Plan to adopt policies related to assessing and protecting historical, archaeological, and unanticipated cultural resources.

Consequently, this alternative would not meet the plan objectives for smart and sensitive development in terms of development construction activities potentially affecting the significance of known and not-yet-identified historic resources during construction activities.

Geology/Soils, and Mineral Resources
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. The 2040 General Plan policy to protect paleontological resources would not be implemented and would result a lack of protection for paleontological resources. Therefore, Alternative 1 geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1634 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-6
The proposed plan’s impacts related to geology/soils and mineral resources would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.5, Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources). Alternative 1 would have a greater impact level compared to the proposed plan based on the lack of a paleontological resource protection policy that would have to be adopted in order to avoid future individual project adverse impacts. Without the adoption of this policy, this alternative would not meet plan objectives for smart and sensitive development in terms of development construction activities potentially affecting paleontological resources.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions generation and energy consumption would occur with development under the existing (2003) General Plan and/or as impacts occur from current population growth rates. However, the existing General Plan does not have relevant goals, policies, or programs that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. Furthermore, Pleasant Hill does not have a Climate Action Plan and would, thus, not meet the State goals to reduce emissions to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Therefore, regardless of alternative implementation, the latest BAAQMD CEQA thresholds for GHG emissions would not be met. Therefore, Alternative 1 impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to GHG emissions and energy would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy). The existing General Plan buildout would have a lesser impact compared to the proposed plan, given less development would occur. However, due to the lack of a General Plan goals, policies, and programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and no existing Climate Action Plan, there would be a lack of consistency with the BAAQMD CEQA thresholds for GHG emissions, and thus the significant impact level would remain the same. This would hinder this alternative’s ability to meet the proposed plan objective to foster economic diversity and sustainability. Furthermore, this alternative would not meet the plan objectives that focus on smart and sensitive development given that existing land uses within the General Plan area would not be updated with more modern facilities in compliance with latest building codes and, thus, would not promote greater energy efficiency nor maximize infill development. This alternative would also not meet the plan objectives that focus on providing balanced growth due to the lack of relevant General Plan goals, policies, and programs that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and plan for sustainable growth.

Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Impacts would occur based on the construction and operational activities following the current adopted General Plan. However, portions of the General Plan area are located in and near a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, a Local Responsibility area, and areas of vegetated open space. Similar to the proposed 2040 General Plan, compliance with applicable codes and regulations would not fully reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfire associated with development under the current General Plan.

Furthermore, population and VMT growth would continue as projected under the current plan. This increase in population and VMT could result in roadway and evacuation route congestion during an

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1635 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-7
emergency. Therefore, Alternative 1 impacts related to hazards, hazardous materials, and wildfire would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to hazards would be significant and unavoidable (see Section

3.7, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire). Alternative 1 would have a similar impact level compared to the proposed plan due to the area being in and near a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, a Local Responsibility area, and areas of vegetated open space. Furthermore, the increase in population and VMT would have a similar impact level on emergency response and evacuation plan consistency. The current General Plan would not meet project objectives due to the lack of a plan to adopt a new General Plan policy to conduct project design review for wildlife risk reduction, which the proposed 2040 General Plan would implement in order to ensure the public safety project objective.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Grounddisturbing construction activities that could potentially affect water quality from sedimentation or accidental spills would occur following current adopted zoning. Any changes related to hydrology, water quality, watersheds and drainage patterns, flood and inundation hazards, and ground water resource management caused by changes in existing development would follow the same adopted standards. Therefore, in comparison to the proposed plan, a similar level of hydrology and water quality impacts would occur under this alternative. Therefore, Alternative 1 impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant (see Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality). The adopted General Plan’s buildout would have a similar less than significant impact on this resource. However, this alternative would not incorporate the proposed plan smart and sensitive development objective due to the lack of hydrology and water quality enhancements that would be implemented by the 2040 General Plan.

Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations would continue to be implemented across the General Plan area.

However, the existing (2003) General Plan did not account for the increase in potential sites for housing and non-residential development. This is evident in the existing General Plan’s Potential Sites for Housing, 1999-2006 (Table H22)2
that only identifies 81.2 acres of vacant or underutilized land, of which 65 acres were deemed available for commercial development potential. This acreage is smaller compared to the 102 acres of vacant or underutilized land identified in the proposed 2040 General Plan, most of which is identified for single-family development (approximately 80 acres) and accounts for the addition of dwelling units that would come with the increase in population.

This alternative would not include allowance for future population and development growth or plan for updated maximum buildout, which the 2040 General Plan would have. Therefore, Alternative 1 land use, population, and housing impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. 2 Pleasant Hill, City of. 2003. General Plan 2003. https://www.pleasanthillca.org/DocumentCenter/View/314/Current-General-Plan (accessed December 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1636 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-8
The proposed plan’s impacts related to land use/planning and population/housing would be less than significant (see Section 3.9, Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing). Alternative 1 would have a greater impact related to land use planning, population, and housing compared to the proposed plan due to the most recent State-mandated RHNA requirements not being met. Without this requirement, population growth and needs would not be met, thus resulting in a greater impact level. In addition, this alternative would not meet the balanced growth or the smart and sensitive development plan objectives due to the lack of planning for anticipated population and balanced development growth.

Noise
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Temporary noise generation or level increase from 2040 General Plan-facilitated future projects would be reduced than under the proposed plan. However, Contra Costa Boulevard/North Main Street was identified as an area with increased mobile noise due to continued development in the area3 , making impacts
potentially significant. Because of this, impacts to noise would still be significant even if no construction were to occur under the adopted plans. Therefore, Alternative 1 impacts related to noise would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to noise would be significant and unavoidable (see Section

3.10, Noise). Alternative 1 would have a similar impact level related to noise compared to the proposed plan. While this alternative would not generate any new and significant noise levels, it would also not have the proposed plan’s noise mitigation. Without mitigation, the proposed plan objective to encourage smart and sensitive development would not be met in terms of development potentially affecting noise-sensitive groups.

Public Services and Recreation
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. The population increase resulting from development facilitated by the existing (2003) General Plan would occur as projected as would an increased demand and usage of public services and recreational facilities.

However, further increase in population and public service demand past the existing General Plan estimate would not be accounted for. Without adoption of the proposed plan, the anticipated population growth and associated increase in use of public services, increased demand for new recreation, and potential increased demand for school services would be unaddressed. However, Alternative 1 population growth would be lower than compared to the estimated population under the proposed plan, such that the additional need for fire and police protection services, parks and recreational facilities, and libraries that would be less significant than that associated with the increased demand generated by the proposed plan. As a result, Alternative 1 public services and recreation impacts would be less than significant.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to public services and recreation would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.11, Public Services and Recreation). The existing General Plan buildout would have a reduced impact of less than significant compared to the proposed plan due to Alternative 1’s relative decreased projected population growth. However, this alternative would not meet the proposed plan objectives to provide balanced growth and ensure public safety due to the 3 Pleasant Hill, City of. 2003. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the City of Pleasant Hill Draft General Plan. https://www.pleasanthillca.org/DocumentCenter/View/316/Draft-EIR-for-the-Draft-General-Plan---Jan-2003 (accessed December 2022).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1637 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-9
lack of planning for increases in demand and potential new construction for necessary public facilities.

Transportation and Traffic
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. The Transportation Impact Analysis for this “No Project” alternative included in Appendix E (see Tables 2 and 3) concluded that VMT per resident would be 11 (which is greater than under the proposed plan) and that VMT per employee would be 14 (which is the same as under the proposed plan).

Changes in VMT per resident and per employee would follow current zoning development standards; however, there would be no plans implemented to ensure a transportation demand management (TDM) plan is created to reduce VMT generated by an individual project, as the current General Plan does not include any. Therefore, Alternative 1 transportation impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to transportation would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.12, Transportation). Alternative 1 would have a greater impact related to transportation compared to the proposed plan due to the lack of mitigation measures and/or plans towards reducing any future individual project VMT increases. This alternative also would not meet the proposed plan goal of encouraging smart and sensitive development, barrier free mobility, or balanced growth due to transportation-related impacts (specifically VMT) would being accounted for or managed.

Utilities and Service Systems
Under Alternative 1, fewer residential units and reduced non-residential development would be developed than under the proposed plan, consistent with allowed existing zoning. Increased demand for stormwater drainage, water supply, or wastewater treatment would be consistent with the projected population increase in the existing (2003) General Plan. There would also be an increase in demand as the City’s population continues to naturally grow. The existing (2003) General Plan would not account for this increase in demand at the level that the proposed plan has anticipated, including increases in demand for water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities. As such, the increase in the utilities and service systems’ operational uses would be unanticipated alongside the increase in demand. Therefore, Alternative 1 utilities and service systems impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed 2040 General Plan’s impacts related to utilities and service systems would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.13, Utilities and Service Systems). The existing General Plan buildout would have a lesser impact compared to the proposed plan due to the existing plan’s lower residential unit count and reduced non-residential development, which would have less of a potential impact compared to the proposed plan’s larger population projection. However, this lower residential unit count and reduced non-residential development would result in fewer potential impacts to utility and service systems but would not change the overall significance level. This alternative would not meet the proposed plan’s smart and sensitive development objective due to the lack of population increase anticipation compared to what the proposed plan have projected.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1638 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-10

5.5.3 Conclusion
In summary, Alternative 1 would avoid the significant and unavoidable public services impacts related to construction of new and expanded schools. However, this alternative would not avoid most of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed plan, including cultural resources (historic resources), GHG emissions, hazards (wildfire exposure risk), noise (construction and operational mobile), and utilities and service systems (construction of new and expanded water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities). There would also be increased impacts related to geology, soils, and mineral resources, land use planning, population, and housing resources, as well as transportation (VMT). Overall, this alternative would not encourage future residential and commercial development to meet the needs of the community with respect to the environment, nor would it advance and maintain an accommodating circulation network for barrier-free mobility to the extent that the proposed plan would.

5.6 Alternative 2: Increased Intensity in Non-western
Areas

5.6.1 Description
The Increased Intensity in the Non-western Areas Alternative (or Alternative 2) would adopt the 2040 General Plan with an increase in density and intensity development in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Alternative 2’s residential and non-residential development totals would be similar to the proposed plan’s buildout projections (see Table 5-1). For purposes of the environmental analysis, it is assumed that the maximum density allowed anywhere within the General Plan area would be 100 units/acre, similar to the proposed plan. However, the average density, and in turn the average floor area ratio (FAR),4 under this alternative would increase with concentrating the same total amount of General Plan buildout development as under the proposed plan within approximately 66 percent of the General Plan area (compared to within 100 percent of the General Plan area under the proposed plan). For purposes of the environmental analysis, it is assumed that the number of persons per household would still be 2.4.5 Based on this, the population would be 46,119, same as under the proposed plan. Alternative 2 would update the Pleasant Hill General Plan but via a different physical configuration and average density resulting in changes to the identified housing opportunity sites, compared to the proposed plan. This alternative would be focused on further enhancement of public safety protection.

5.6.2 Impact Analysis
Aesthetics
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would be focused in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Development would tend to be located along transportation corridors in the eastern portion rather than along commercial corridors and/or infill development throughout the entire General Plan area. There would be an overall FAR increase that would 4 FAR is the relationship between the total amount of usable floor area that a building would have, and the total area of the lot on which the building would stand. A higher FAR would indicate greater density (i.e., greater gross square footage per lot area). 5 California Department of Finance. 2022. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2021-2022. Available: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-countiesand-the-state-2020-2022/ (accessed December 2022)

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1639 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-11
potentially affect visual character in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area.

Available scenic vistas, such as public views of the hills west of Pleasant Hill, could be impacted by the building height increases with development concentrated in the eastern and central areas.

However, this alternative would require mitigation to comply with the Pleasant Hill Municipal Code Title 18, Planning and Land Use. Therefore, Alternative 2 impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.1, Aesthetics). Alternative 2 would have a greater level of aesthetics impact compared to the proposed plan due to the increased density of development in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area, resulting in potentially adverse effects on scenic vistas but not to the extent of increasing the impact significance level. This alternative would not meet proposed plan objectives for smart and sensitive development, as it would result in increased FAR and building heights that could result in development to block scenic vistas.

Air Quality
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. There would be similar levels of overall construction-related and operation-related emissions. There would be a temporary increase in emissions from construction activities and similar operational emissions and odors that would require mitigation measures similar to the proposed plan. Therefore, Alternative 2 air quality impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to air quality would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.2, Air Quality). Alternative 2 would have a similar level of impacts compared to the proposed plan with impacts requiring mitigation measures available to further construction-related and operation-related impacts similar to the proposed plan (MM AQ-1 through AQ-4). Alternative 2 would meet the proposed plan objective of smart and sensitive development, as this alternative would adopt proposed plan policies to help address air quality impacts from construction and operational activities.

Biological, Agriculture, and Forestry Resources
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Development would be required to implement the same federal, State, and local regulations to not impact agricultural, forestry, and most biological resources in the area. However, development in this area could result in some potential direct or indirect impacts on nesting birds and roosting bats. As a result, the same mitigation measures (MM BIO-1 and BIO-2) would be required for development under Alternative 2 to occur. Therefore, Alternative 2 biological, agriculture, and forestry resources impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated (see Section 3.3, Biological, Agriculture, and Forestry Resources). Alternative 2 would have a similar impact level on biological resources compared to the proposed plan. This alternative would achieve the proposed plan objective related to the adoption of the proposed 2040 General Plan Environment Element update and Environment Element Program. This alternative would also encourage smart and sensitive development that would also meet proposed plan objectives.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1640 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-12
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would be focused in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Because this development would be more concentrated in these areas, potential impacts related to historical resources, such as buildings over 45 years old or older, would be reduced. However, this alternative would still require the same mitigation (MM CR-1 through CR-4) related to potential alteration of historic and archeological resources due to potential development. Therefore, even with the mitigation identified for the proposed plan, Alternative 2 cultural and tribal resources impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to Cultural and Tribal Resources would be significant and unavoidable with mitigation incorporated (see Section 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources).

Alternative 2 would have lesser impacts compared to the proposed plan due to a relative decreased footprint of potential historic resources affects but not to the extent of reducing the impact significance level. However, this alternative would meet the proposed plan objective for smart and sensitive development due to the increase in FAR resulting in concentrating development in central and eastern portions of the General Plan area, which would decrease the potential for historic resources to be impacted by development construction-related activities.

Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. The central and eastern portions of the General Plan area are mostly underlain by sediments ranging from the Holocene to the Paleocene, with the older sediments being at a higher paleontological sensitivity level. Therefore, these paleontological resources would experience ground-disturbing activity due to construction efforts resulting from Alternative 2, which has the potential to have an adverse impact on erosion prevention and sediment control. However, this alternative includes the adoption of the proposed plan’s mitigation measures to incorporate a paleontological resources protection policy (MM GEO-1). Therefore, Alternative 2 geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to geological, soil, and mineral resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated (see Section 3.5, Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources).

Alternative 2 would have a similar level of geological, soil, and mineral resource impacts compared to the proposed plan with MM GEO-1 implemented. Incorporation of the proposed plan and its mitigation measures would help this alternative meet the proposed plan objective for smart and sensitive development in terms of the measures taken to reduce the chance of development construction activities potentially affecting paleontological resources.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. There would be construction activities that would occur in order to increase development within the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Due to the increase in development density and intensity in a smaller portion of the General Plan area, mobile GHG emissions could be reduced. However, there would still not be a defined strategy as to

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1641 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-13
how the City would meet the goals to reduce emissions to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2045. Without a clearly defined outline for this goal, the BAAQMD CEQA thresholds for GHG emissions would not be met. Therefore, Alternative 2 impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to GHG emissions and energy would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy). Although the impact level of mobile GHG emissions could be lessened related to potentially lower VMT, Alternative 2 would have a similar impact level compared to the proposed plan due to the lack of consistency with the BAAQMD CEQA thresholds for GHG emissions. This would hinder this alternative’s ability to meet the proposed plan objective to foster economic diversity and sustainability. Furthermore, the proposed plan objectives to encourage smart and sensitive development and ensure public safety would not be met in terms of emissions of GHGs.

Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, however, development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Due to development being more concentrated in the central and eastern portion of the General Plan area further away from vegetated open space areas and State and locally designated wildfire risk areas (the southwestern portion of the City Limits and the western and southwestern portions of the Sphere of Influence outside of City Limits), wildfire exposure risk would be reduced. Additionally, this alternative would adopt the proposed plan’s mitigation measures (MM HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and HAZ-3) to implement a new General Plan policy to conduct project design review for wildfire risk reduction, which would further decrease potential wildfire impacts under this alternative. In addition, impacts related to potential exposure to hazardous materials and non-wildfire hazards (flooding) would be less than significant similar to the proposed plan. Development facilitated by Alternative 2 would result in similar population as under the proposed plan, which could increase roadway congestion. Alternative 2 may hinder evacuation routes during an emergency since additional population would be concentrated in eastern and central areas. Therefore, Alternative 2 impacts related to hazards, hazardous materials, and wildfire would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to hazards would be significant and unavoidable (see Section

3.7, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire). Alternative 2 would have a lesser impact level compared to the proposed plan due the increase in development density within the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area and incorporation of the proposed plan’s hazards mitigation measures requiring design review, construction, and project design wildfire risk reduction measures to the extent of reducing the impact significance level to less than significant with mitigation. . Alternative 2 would meet the proposed plan objective to ensure public safety by locating development farther from designated wildfire risk areas and adopting measures to review project designs to ensure that wildfire risk reduction measures are incorporated.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. With concentration of development in a smaller portion of the General Plan area, increased FAR would occur within these areas. This similarity in development type compared to the proposed plan would also result in the similar potential effect on hydrology,

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1642 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) 5-14
City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
water quality, watersheds and drainage patterns, flood and inundation hazards, and ground water resource management. Alternative 2 would also implement applicable hydrology and water quality enhancements similar to the proposed plan that the existing (2003) General Plan would lack.

Therefore, Alternative 2 impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant (see Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality). Alternative 2 would have a similar impact level of less than significant. This alternative would meet the proposed plan objective to encourage smart and sensitive development, as it would implement the 2040 General Plan policies to meet the most recent water quality standards.

Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Increased density and intensity development would occur in the central and eastern portions and would be consistent with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations. The increase in density through increased FAR instead of additional building development would avoid any physical divide in community areas and potential displacement.

Alternative 2 would also accommodate and plan for population growth and any development.

Therefore, Alternative 2 impacts related to land use planning, population, and housing would be less than significant.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to land use and population/housing would be less than significant (see Section 3.9, Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing). Alternative 2 would have a similar impact level compared to the proposed plan. Though both plans assume maximum residential and non-residential buildout, unlike the proposed plan, Alternative 2 would not meet plan objectives to support diverse housing options and balanced growth.

Noise
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. Construction to increase building heights throughout the proposed area would occur, likely causing new noise sources due to construction activities. While this alternative would adopt the proposed plan’s mitigation measures to reduce new noise production (MM NOI-1 and NOI-2), impacts on noise would still be significant due to the temporary increase in noise levels during construction potentially affecting nearby noise-sensitive receptors and exceeding noise standards. Therefore, Alternative 2 impacts related to noise would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to noise would be significant and unavoidable (see Section

3.10, Noise). Alternative 2 would have a similar significance level compared to the proposed plan due to noise from construction activities temporarily exceeding noise standards. This alternative would meet the proposed plan’s smart and sensitive development objective in terms of noise management decreasing potential effects on sensitive receptors.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1643 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-15
Public Services and Recreation
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. The increase in development similar to the proposed plan with increased FAR would cause a population increase, specifically among school-aged children. This increase would result in a higher demand for old and new public services, such as schools. As a result, the large amount of net new school facilities anticipated under this alternative would result in significant construction impacts associated with air quality, cultural resources, paleontological resources, and VMT. These impacts would be similar to the proposed plan’s impacts on schools.

Furthermore, development facilitated by Alternative 2 would concentrate population within Pleasant Hill, resulting in the same additional need for fire and police protection services, parks and recreational facilities, and libraries as under the proposed plan. However, the increase demand for schools resulting from development facilitated under Alternative 2 would still result in public services and recreation impacts being significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to public services and recreation would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.11, Public Services and Recreation). Alternative 2 would have a similar impact level compared to the proposed plan. This alternative would meet the proposed plan objectives to provide balanced growth and ensure public safety, because the increase in demand and potential new construction for public facilities would be accounted for.

Transportation
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. There would be an increase in FAR that could lead to a decrease in VMT per resident and employee as people move into these new spaces for work and living purposes. While future buildout still anticipates the same development total similar to the proposed plan buildout projections (see Table 5-1) resulting in an increase in population, the increase in development density would contribute to an overall VMT reduction. Furthermore, development buildout under this alternative would be planned more proximate to transportation corridors in the eastern and central portions of the General Plan area. As a result, VMT-related impacts would be reduced. However, similar to the proposed plan, Alternative 2 transportation impacts would be significant and unavoidable due to the lack of a specific TDM plan with TDM programs to ensure reduction and mitigation of VMT impacts.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to transportation would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.12, Transportation). Alternative 2 would have a lesser impact compared to the proposed plan due to the reduction in VMT per resident and employee but not to the extent of reducing the impact significance level. However, this alternative would meet the proposed plan objective to provide barrier-free mobility due to the increase in FAR and concentrated location of development resulting in a potential decrease in VMT per resident and per employee across the General Plan area.

Utilities and Service Systems
Under Alternative 2, the same total amount of residential and non-residential development would occur as under the proposed plan, but development would occur only in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area. There would be in an increase in demand for water, wastewater,

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1644 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-16
and stormwater facilities compared to existing conditions with this alternative’s increase in population. Construction-related impacts due to potential need for new or expanded utility infrastructure and facilities would be significant and unavoidable, as there would be significant and unavoidable construction impacts associated with air quality, historic resources, paleontological resources, and noise. Furthermore, the construction of the new or expanded facilities would result in an unanticipated increase in operational demand. Therefore, Alternative 2 utilities and service systems impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to utilities and service systems would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.13, Utilities and Service Systems). Alternative 2 would have a similar significant and unavoidable impact level compared to the proposed plan due to impacts associated with construction and operation of new or expanded facilities. However, this alternative would meet the proposed plan balanced growth objective due to the population and related utilities demand increase being planned for with implementation of the proposed 2040 General Plan under this alternative.

5.6.3 Conclusion
In summary, Alternative 2 would have a reduced impact level related to cultural resources (i.e., historical resources), transportation (i.e., VMT), and hazards (i.e., wildfire exposure risk). However, the cultural resources and transportation impacts would remain at a significant and unavoidable impact level. Furthermore, this alternative would not avoid or reduce the significant and unavoidable GHG emissions, noise, public services, and utilities and service systems impacts of the proposed plan and would also result in an increased significant aesthetics impact related to scenic vistas of the hills west of Pleasant Hill. However, this alternative would advance the proposed plan objectives to provide barrier-free mobility and encourage smart and sensitive development that would meet the needs of the community throughout the General Plan area.

5.7 Alternative 3: 25 Percent Residential Reduction

5.7.1 Description
The 25 percent Residential Reduction Alternative (or Alternative 3) would reduce residential buildout by 25 percent compared to the proposed plan’s projected buildout. Compared to the proposed plan, the number of multi-family residential units would decrease by 3,016 units, and single-family (including ADUs) residential units would decrease by 1,787 units (see Table 5-1). Nonresidential gross square footage amount and type breakdown would be the same as under the proposed plan. This alternative would have the same overall footprint (but lower residential density and height) across the General Plan area as the proposed plan while not falling below the RHNA requirements or changing the identified housing opportunity sites. For purposes of the environmental analysis, it is assumed that the number of persons per household would still be 2.4. 6 Based on this, there would be a 11,528-population decrease under Alternative 3. Alternative 3 would update the Pleasant Hill General Plan but via a reduced residential growth scenario. This alternative would be focused on smart and sensitive growth while still meeting RHNA requirements. 6 California Department of Finance. 2022. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2021-2022. Available: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-countiesand-the-state-2020-2022/ (accessed December 2022)

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1645 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-17

5.7.2 Impact Analysis
Aesthetics
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. The decrease in residential development would result in a reduced impact on views, nighttime lighting, and shadow, as there would be less residential uses on-site than the proposed plan anticipated. This would result in a less than significant impact on aesthetic resources.

However, due to this alternative having the same footprint as the proposed plan, impacts would be similar to the proposed plan’s impacts on aesthetics and a mitigation measure (MM AES-1) would be incorporated. Therefore, Alternative 3 impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.1, Aesthetics). Alternative 3 would have a similar impact on aesthetics due to the similarity in development footprint compared to the proposed plan; however, the impact level would be incrementally reduced due to the relative decrease in residential development decreasing potential impacts on scenic vistas. This alternative would meet the proposed plan objective to encourage smart and sensitive development, due to the overall impacts related to aesthetics being lesser while providing an increase in development potential.

Air Quality
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. The decrease in residential development could result in less mobile-related emissions compared to the proposed plan. However, construction is still anticipated under this alternative and would result in the generation of criteria air and toxic air contaminant emissions during construction of individual future projects that could in turn affect regional air quality and local respiratory health. As a result, this alternative would still implement proposed plan mitigation measures to adopt and implement new General Plan policies to reduce construction and operational impacts to air quality (MM AQ-1 through AQ-4). Therefore, Alternative 3 air quality impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to air quality would be less than significant with mitigation (see Section 3.2, Air Quality). Alternative 3 would have a similar level of impacts compared to the proposed plan, due to the same development footprint as the proposed plan and, thus, the same amount of development grading and other construction activities impacting air quality.

Implementing proposed plan mitigation to adopt General Plan policies to reduce constructionrelated emissions (MM AQ-1), reduce operation-related emissions (MM AQ-2), and implement construction health risk assessments (MM AQ-3)would result in this alternative meeting the proposed plan objective to ensure public safety given that implementation of these policies would result in decreased impacts related to public health.

Biological, Agriculture, and Forestry Resources
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. This development would be required to implement the same federal,

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1646 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-18
State, and local regulations to not impact agricultural, forestry, and most biological resources in the area. However, there is the potential for development to result in direct or indirect potential impacts on nesting birds and roosting bats. As a result, the same mitigation measures (MM BIO-1 and BIO-2) would be required for development under Alternative 2. Therefore, Alternative 3 biological, agriculture, and forestry resources impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated (see Section 3.3, Biological, Agriculture, and Forestry Resources). Alternative 3 would have a similar level of impact related to biological resources compared to the proposed plan. This alternative would achieve the proposed plan objective for smart and sensitive development, due to the adoption of updated regulations for biological resources.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. Construction similar to the proposed plan’s projections would occur but would develop less residential units compared to the proposed plan. However, the same development footprint as the proposed plan is still anticipated, meaning development under this alternative could result in a substantial adverse change on historical resources identified as buildings over 45 years old. The proposed plan’s mitigation measure could be implemented by preparing historical resource evaluations to reduce significant historical resource impacts before construction (MM CR-1), assessing archeological resources before future project approval (MM CR-2), and stopping construction in the event of an unanticipated discovery (MM CR-3 and CR-4). However, even with mitigation implementation, existing historical resources could still be materially impaired by individual future projects and the loss of historical fabric could not be readily compensated for by commemorative mitigation. Therefore, Alternative 3 cultural and tribal resources impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to Cultural and Tribal Resources would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources). Alternative 3 would have a similar level of significant and unavoidable resource impacts compared to the proposed plan.

However, this alternative would meet the proposed plan objective to encourage smart and sensitive development because the projected residential buildout reduction would reduce the potential for development to impact historic resources.

Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. The decreased residential buildout construction would be underlain by sediments ranging from the Holocene to the Paleocene, with the older sediments being at a higher paleontological sensitivity level. Therefore, these paleontological resources would experience ground-disturbing activity due to construction efforts resulting from Alternative 2, which has the potential to adverse impact the sediments. Therefore, this alternative would adopt the proposed plan’s mitigation measure to incorporate a paleontological resources protection policy (MM GEO-1).

Alternative 3 geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to geological, soil, and mineral resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated (see Section 3.5, Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources).

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1647 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-19
Alternative 3 would result in lesser geological, soil, and mineral resource impacts compared to the proposed plan with MM GEO-1 implemented due to the decreased number of units resulting in a decrease in potential cases of impacts on paleontological resources but not to the extent of decreasing the impact significance level. Implementing the proposed plan and its mitigation measures would help meet the proposed plan objective encouraging smart and sensitive development, due to the decreased potential of development construction activities affecting paleontological resources.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. While this alternative would adopt the GHG mitigation measures from the proposed plan to combat any impacts, there would still be the issue of the need for a defined strategy as to how City would meet the goal to reduce emissions to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2045. However, with mitigation measures in place (MM GHG-1 and GHG-2), the decrease in residential unit construction would lessen GHG emissions impacts compared to the proposed plan. Therefore, Alternative 3 impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to GHG emissions and energy would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy). Alternative 3 would have a lesser impact level due to the decrease in residential buildout. However, with the need to implement mitigation measures for this plan to be consistent with BAAQMD CEQA thresholds for GHG emissions, impacts would still be significant and unavoidable. This would hinder this alternative’s ability to meet the proposed plan objective to foster economic diversity and sustainability. Furthermore, the proposed plan objective to encourage smart and sensitive development would not be met with regard to emissions of GHGs.

Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. Construction plans and operational activities would likely follow guidelines and regulations to avoid significant effects from hazardous material transportation, emission, and/or exposure. However, this alternative would be built out throughout the entire General Plan area, including the southwestern portion of the City Limits and the western and southwestern portions of the City Sphere of Influence outside of City Limits, which are in and near a High Fire Severity Zone and Local Responsibility Area. Although this alternative has decreased development, its overall footprint would be the same as the proposed plan’s footprint, resulting in the same siting of development in and near wildfire risk zones. Furthermore, this alternative would result in a decrease in population compared to the proposed plan, which may potentially congest roadways and evacuation routes during an emergency. Therefore, Alternative 3 impacts related to hazards, hazardous materials, and wildfire would still be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to hazards would be significant and unavoidable (see Section

3.7, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, and Wildfire). Alternative 3 would have a lesser impact level compared to the proposed plan due to the area being in and near a High Fire Severity Zone, a Local Responsibility Area, and areas of vegetated open space, but not to the extent of changing the significance level. The population decrease would also result in a significant impact level due to

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1648 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-20
potential impacts on emergency response and evacuation plan consistency. Alternative 3 would meet plan objective with policy incorporation (MM HAZ-1), which would ensure public safety by reducing the risk of wildfire impacts through project design assessment.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. Water quality standards, drainage patterns, flood and inundation hazards, and water management plans would be similar to the proposed plan’s impact due to the similarity in development footprint. However, less residential units under this alternative and implementation of applicable hydrology and water quality enhancements over the 2003 adopted General Plan would reduce the impact level. Therefore, Alternative 3 impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant (see Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality). Alternative 3 would have a similar less-thansignificant impact on these resources but at a lesser level due to the decrease in residential units.

This alternative would meet the proposed plan objective for smart and sensitive development, due to the implementation of proposed plan policies to meet the most recent water quality standards.

Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. This change in development envelope would likely not result in a change of zoning designations that could conflict with the land use plans, policies, and regulations currently in place; rather it is anticipated land use designations would remain similar to the proposed plan, given that full density allowance would not be exercised. However, this impact would remain at a less than significant impact level with updates to the Zoning Code that follow General Plan implementation. Therefore, Alternative 3 land use, population, and housing impacts would be less than significant at a greater impact level.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to land use would be less than significant (see Section 3.9, Land Use Planning, Population, and Housing). While still at a less-than-significant level, Alternative 3 would have greater land use planning, population, and housing impacts compared to the proposed plan, due to the Zoning Code update to follow the General Plan update. This alternative would still achieve the development variety because this alternative would still implement the proposed 2040 General Plan, which would fulfill the plan objective to support diverse housing options.

Noise
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. Development under this alternative could result in new noise sources.

Although there would be a decrease in construction activities for residential units, development would still occur under this alternative, meaning impacts related to noise would remain significant due to the temporary increase in noise levels during construction which could potentially affect nearby noise-sensitive receptors by exceeding noise standards. As a result, this alternative would adopt the proposed plan’s mitigation measures to reduce new noise production (MM NOI-1 and NOI-2). Therefore, Alternative 3 impacts related to noise would be significant and unavoidable.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1649 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-21
The proposed plan’s impacts related to noise would be significant and unavoidable (see Section

3.10, Noise). Alternative 2 would have a similar significance level compared to the proposed plan, due to noise associated with construction activities temporarily exceeding noise standards. This alternative would meet the proposed plan objective to encourage smart and sensitive development via management of noise increase.

Public Services and Recreation
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. While residential development would be decreased under this alternative, the population is still projected to increase by 34,591 persons (see Table 5-1). This would include an increase in school-aged children, which would result in a higher demand for old and new public services, such as schools. As a result, the large amount of net new school facilities anticipated under this alternative would result in significant construction impacts associated with air quality, cultural resources, paleontological resources, and noise. Development facilitated by Alternative 3 would increase the population of Pleasant Hill compared to existing conditions that could still result in the additional need for fire and police protection services, parks and recreational facilities, and libraries.

Population increase facilitated by development under Alternative 3 would result in public services and recreation impacts being significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to public services and recreation would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.11, Public Services and Recreation). Alternative 3 would have a similar impact level compared to the proposed plan, though slightly reduced due to fewer residential units.

This alternative would also meet the proposed plan objectives to provide balanced growth and ensure public safety, because the increase in demand and potential new construction for public facilities would be accounted for.

Transportation
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. The relative decrease in residential development would result in a relative decrease in population (see Table 5-1), which in turn would result in a relative decrease in VMT compared to the proposed plan. As a result, there would be an incremental decrease related to transportation impacts under Alternative 3. However, without an implemented TDM plan, Alternative 3 transportation impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to transportation would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.12, Transportation). Alternative 2 would have lesser impacts compared to the proposed plan due to the relative decrease in VMT as a result of the relative decrease in projected population but not to the extent of changing the significance level. In addition, this alternative would meet the proposed plan objectives to encourage smart and sensitive development and barrier free mobility given the assumption that Alternative 3 would also implement a TDM plan to further ensure VMT reduction.

Utilities and Service Systems
Under Alternative 3, 25 percent fewer residential units and the same total amount of nonresidential development would occur as under the proposed plan, and overall development would have the same footprint. There would be a decrease in residential development, which would result

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1650 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-22
in a reduced demand for stormwater drainage, water supply, and wastewater treatment in comparison to the proposed plan. However, because development and population increase would still occur under this alternative, construction and operation-related impacts due to the need and use for new or expanded utility infrastructure and facilities that comes from an increase in population would be significant, due to the significant and unavoidable construction and operational impacts associated with air quality, historic resources, paleontological resources, and noise. Therefore, Alternative 3 utilities and service systems impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The proposed plan’s impacts related to utilities and service systems would be significant and unavoidable (see Section 3.13, Utilities and Service Systems). Alternative 3 would have a similar impact level to the proposed plan, due to impacts associated with construction of new or expanded facilities. However, this alternative would meet the proposed plan objective regarding smart and sensitive development due to the planning and implementation of this alternative accounting for the population and related utilities demand increase.

5.7.3 Conclusion
In summary, Alternative 3 would not avoid the significant and unavoidable cultural resources (i.e., historical resources), hazards (i.e., wildfire), noise, public services, and utilities impacts of the proposed plan. Impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions would also be significant and unavoidable, but at a lesser level. Furthermore, land use impacts would remain less than significant, but at a greater level. Impacts related to aesthetics and geology/soils would still be less than significant with mitigation, but at a lesser level. This alternative would still satisfy the goal to advance the smart and sensitive development objective of the proposed plan to the same extent that the proposed plan would due to the same balanced growth goals and policies . However, the decrease in residential units would potentially undermine the objective to support diverse housing options given reduced density options.

5.8 Alternatives Considered but Rejected
The following summarizes alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected for inclusion in the analysis, because they would not meet most of the proposed plan objectives, would not substantially reduce impacts compared to the proposed plan, or were determined to be infeasible.

1. The City considered a potential “Increased Residential” alternative that would increase the amount of residential buildout throughout the General Plan area but eliminate some nonresidential land use development as a result. Underutilized or vacant areas designated for commercial or other non-residential use would instead be designated for residential buildout.

This potential alternative would meet the proposed plan objective to further support diverse housing options. However, the proposed 2040 General Plan already meets and exceeds the RHNA requirements, meaning that an increase in residential buildout would far exceed RHNA requirements beyond the need for additional residential development. This alternative would also impact non-residential development, which would potentially result in residents needing to drive further to access commercial goods and services that would be located outside the General Plan area. The potential alternative would also lead to additional significant impacts in other resource areas, such as construction-related Air Quality and operational-related Transportation impacts.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1651 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-23

2. The City considered a potential “Reduced Commercial” alternative that would reduce nonresidential commercial buildout throughout the General Plan area compared to the proposed plan. This alternative would not support maintaining of adequate public safety funding or economic viability diversity and sustainability (i.e., reduced sales tax collected from nonresidential land uses). Furthermore, this alternative would also potentially increase vehicle miles traveled, as residents and employees would likely need to travel further to access commercial centers and employment centers located further away within the General Plan area or outside of the General Plan area.

3. The City considered a potential “Reduced Residential” alternative that would entail a maximum net new residential buildout of 1,500 dwelling units resulting in a 31,695-population decrease compared to the proposed plan. This potential alternative could help meet the project objective to encourage smart and sensitive development within the City. However, this reduction of residential buildout would not meet the RHNA requirements, which would result in this potential alternative not meeting overall project objectives. This potential alternative would also not account for the natural increase of population and resulting housing need, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact related to land use planning.

5.9 Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(e)(2) requires identification of an environmentally superior alternative. If the “No Project” Alternative is environmentally superior, CEQA requires selection of the “environmentally superior alternative other than the No Project Alternative” from among the proposed plan and the alternatives evaluated.

5.9.1 Alternative Impacts and Meeting Objectives Comparison To identify the environmentally superior alternative in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, Table 5-2 presents a comparison of the impacts related to the alternatives and indicates whether each alternative’s environmental impact is greater than, lesser than, or similar to that of the proposed plan for each of the topic areas that were analyzed.

Table 5-2 Summary of Alternatives’ Impacts
Issue
Proposed plan
Impact
Classification
Alternative 1
Impact
Classification
Alternative 2 Impact
Classification
Alternative 3 Impact
Classification
Aesthetics LTSM LTSM (Lesser) LTSM (Greater) LTSM (Lesser) Air Quality LTSM LTSM (Lesser) LTSM (Similar) LTSM (Similar) Biological, Agriculture, and
Forestry Resources
LTSM LTSM (Similar) LTSM (Similar) LTSM (Similar)
Cultural and Tribal Cultural
Resources
SU SU (Lesser) SU (Lesser) SU (Similar)
Geology, Soils, and Mineral
Resources
LTSM LTSM (Greater) LTSM (Similar) LTSM (Lesser)
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Energy
SU SU (Lesser) SU (Similar) SU (Lesser)
Hazards, Hazardous
Materials, and Wildfire
SU SU (Similar) LTSM (Lesser) SU (Similar)
Hydrology and Water Quality LTS LTS (Similar) LTS (Similar) LTS (Lesser)

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1652 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-24
Issue
Proposed plan
Impact
Classification
Alternative 1
Impact
Classification
Alternative 2 Impact
Classification
Alternative 3 Impact
Classification
Land Use Planning,
Population, and Housing
LTS LTSM (Greater) LTS (Similar) LTSM (Greater)
Noise SU SU (Similar) SU (Similar) SU (Similar)
Public Services and
Recreation
SU LTS (Lesser) SU (Similar) SU (Similar)
Transportation SU SU (Greater) SU (Lesser) SU (Lesser)
Utilities and Service Systems SU SU (Lesser) SU (Similar) SU (Similar) Notes: NI = No Impact; LTS = Less than Significant; LTSM = Less than Significant with Mitigation; SU = Significant and Unavoidable Alternative 1 Comparison to Proposed Plan Summary
The Buildout of Adopted General Plan Alternative would generally result in lesser impacts compared to the proposed plan (see Table 5-2). By not having any planned construction or new operational activities, compared to the proposed plan, Alternative 1 would result in lesser impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emission and energy, public services and recreation, and utilities and service systems. Alternative 1 would have similar impact levels compared to the proposed plan related to biological, agricultural, and forestry resources, GHG emissions, hazards, hazardous materials, and wildfire, hydrology and water quality, and noise.

Impacts related to geology, soils, and mineral resources as well as land use planning, population, and housing would be greater compared to the proposed plan. However, Alternative 1 would not meet the plan’s objectives, as it would not increase the residential and community opportunities or facilitate identified needed development in the proposed General Plan area, thus not meeting the current RHNA. It would also not incorporate any of the mitigation or preventative measures that the proposed plan would incorporate.

Alternative 2 Comparison to Proposed Plan Summary
The Increased Intensity in Non-western Areas Alternative would generally result in overall similar environmental impacts compared to the proposed plan (see Table 5-2). By increasing development intensity in the central and eastern portions of the General Plan area, Alternative 2 would result in lesser impacts related to cultural resources and transportation.. However, due to the increase in FAR, Alternative 2 would result in greater impacts related to aesthetics compared to the proposed plan. Alternative 2 would also have similar impact levels compared to the proposed plan on wildfire.

Overall, this alternative would advance the proposed plan objectives to provide barrier-free mobility and encourage smart development throughout the General Plan area, due to having a similar development footprint with incorporation of the proposed 2040 General Plan.

Alternative 3 Comparison to Proposed Plan Summary
The 25 Percent Residential Reduction Alternative would generally result in similar and lesser environmental impacts compared to the proposed plan (see Table 5-2). Alternative 3 would result in lesser impacts related to aesthetics, geology, soils, and mineral resources, GHG emissions, hydrology, and transportation. However, due to the decrease in residential availability, Alternative 3 would result in greater impacts related to land use planning, population, and housing compared to the proposed plan. This alternative would advance the smart and sensitive development and barrier-free mobility objectives of the proposed plan, due to the decrease in development resulting

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1653 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) EIR Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Report 5-25
in lesser impacts and providing more potential development opportunities throughout the General Plan area. However, Alternative 3 would not advance the overall land use and housing options diversity objective of the proposed plan, due to the decrease in residential units limiting opportunity for housing diversity.

5.9.2 Identification of Environmentally Superior Alternative Based on the alternatives analysis provided in this EIR chapter, the Adopted General Plan Buildout Alternative (Alternative 1) is the environmentally superior alternative, as it would either be similar to or lessen the severity of most impacts of the proposed plan. However, it would not meet proposed plan objectives without any development or policy additions regarding improvements. If the “No Project” Alternative is determined to avoid or reduce more impacts than any other alternative, CEQA requires that the EIR identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[e]).

The Increased Intensity in Non-western Areas Alternative (Alternative 2) would further reduce impacts compared to the 25 Percent Residential Reduction Alternative (Alternative 3) due to this alternative avoiding significant and unavoidable impacts to wildfire. Comparatively, while most Alternative 3 impacts are similar in significance to the proposed plan but would not meet most plan objectives, Alternative 2 would meet the proposed plan objectives and it would also avoid the significant and unavoidable wildfire exposure risk impact.

The 25 Percent Residential Reduction Alternative (Alternative 3) would have some lesser impacts (aesthetics, geology, GHG emissions, and hydrology) compared to the Increased Intensity in Nonwestern Areas Alternative (Alternative 2) but not to the extent of reducing the significance level of impact. In addition, while the proposed project objectives would be met under Alternative 2, Alternative 3 would advance only the project objectives to encourage smart and sensitive development and provide barrier-free mobility due to the decrease in residential units.

Overall, of the other alternatives evaluated in this EIR chapter, the Increased Intensity in Nonwestern Areas Alternative (Alternative 2) would be the environmentally superior alternative.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1654 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
5-26
This page intentionally left blank.

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1655 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Contributors and Preparers
Draft Environmental Impact Report 6-1
6 Contributors and Preparers

6.1 EIR Contributors
Pleasant Hill Planning Division
Ethan Bindernagel, Community Development Director
Troy Fujimoto, City Planner
Haley Croffoot, Senior Planner
Pleasant Hill Engineering Division
Ananthan Kanagasundaram, City Engineer
Ryan Cook, Senior Engineer
Pleasant Hill City Attorney Office
Janet Coleson, City Attorney
Sarah Owsowitz, City Attorney
Pleasant Hill Recreation and Park District
Michelle Lacy, General Manager
Pleasant Hill Police Department
Scott Vermillion, Police Captain
Mt. Diablo Unified School District
Lisa Gonzales, EdD, Chief Business Officer
Contra Costa County Fire Protection District
General Information ([email protected])
Contra Costa County Library
Patrick Remer, Community Library Manager
Contra Costa Water District
Oliver Symonds, Senior Public Information Specialist
Jill Mosley, Principal Engineer
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Chris Carpenter, Senior Community Affairs Representative East Bay Municipal Utility District
Kathryn Horn, Community Affairs

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1656 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
6-2
Pacific Gas and Electric
Michael Bragen, Agency Liaison

6.2 EIR Preparers
This EIR was prepared by the City of Pleasant Hill, with the assistance of Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Consultant staff involved in the preparation of the EIR and associated transportation impact analysis (TIA) technical study are listed below.

RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. (EIR PREPARER)
Kelsey Bennett, Senior Project Manager, Principal Environmental Planner, & GHG Specialist Leslie Trejo, Assistant Project Manager & Environmental Planner Matthew Maddox, Environmental Principal
Jesse Voremberg, Environmental Analyst
Kayleigh Limbach, Environmental Analyst
Lyndsey Baughman, Environmental Analyst
Gianna Meschi, Environmental Planner
Aubrey Mescher, Senior Environmental Planner
Hayley Rundle, Air, Noise, and GHG/Energy Analyst
Josh Carman, Senior Air, Noise, and GHG/Energy Specialist Beth Wilson, Biologist
Kristin Asmus, Senior Biologist
JulieAnn Murphy, Architectural Historian
Leanna Flaherty, Archeologist
Andrew McGrath, Paleontologist
Steven Treffers, Senior Cultural Resources Specialist
Darcy Kremin, Photographer
Gina Gerlich, GIS/Graphics Specialist
Emily Gaston, GIS/Graphics Specialist
Katherine Castanon, GIS/Graphics Specialist
Luis Apolinar, Publishing Specialist

FEHR AND PEERS (TIA PREPARER)
Ellen Poling, TIA Manager
Cody Lim, Transportation Engineer/Planner
Valerie Tan, Transportation Planner
Bruno Lertora, Transportation Planner

MINTIER HARNISH (GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INFORMATION PROVIDER) Jim Harnish, General Plan Principal
Brent Gibbons, General Plan Project Manager
Ryan Lester, General Plan Analyst

4.1.k
Packet Pg. 1657 Attachment: Attachment K - Draft EIR (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix A
NOP and Scoping Comments Received

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1658 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill

NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND SCOPING MEETING
Environmental Impact Report for the
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Thursday,July 7,2022
Reviewing Agencies,Organizations,and Interested Parties Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Pleasant Hill General Plan Update as well as Notice of EIR Scoping Meeting on Tuesday,July 26,2022 The City of Pleasant Hill (City), as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), is preparing an update to the Pleasant Hill General Plan that will guide growth and development through 2040 and has determined that preparation of a programmatic EIR is necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the 2040 General Plan and associated Zoning Code amendments pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City is the CEQA Lead Agency and is requesting input on the scope of the EIR from responsible and trustee agencies,interested public agencies and organizations,and the general public (pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15082).

This NOP provides a summary of the plan,the City's preliminary identification of the potential environmental issues to be analyzed in the programmatic EIR; and information on how to comment on the scope of the EIR. This NOP and background documents associated with the 2040 General Plan are available for review on the Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan webpage at:https://pleasanthill2040.com/.

Date:

To:

Subject:

EIR NOP Public Review Period: July 7,2022 to August 8, 2022 The City requests your review and consideration of this notice and invites input and comments from interested agencies, persons, and organizations regarding the preparation of the 2040 General Plan EIR. Comments in response to this notice must be in writingand submitted to the Lead Agency Contact below by 5:00p.m. on Monday August 8, 2022. If applicable, please indicate a contact person for your agency or organization.

NOP Written Comments:Comments must be submitted via mail or email with "NOP Comments: Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan EIR" in the subject line and the name and physical address of the commenter in the body of the comment to the Lead Agency Contact at the following address or e-mail by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, August 8, 2022:

Troy Fujimoto,City Planner
Pleasant Hill Planning Division
100 Gregory Lane,Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
Tfuiimoto(5> pleasanthillca.org
EIR Public Scoping Meeting: The City will hold a public EIR scoping meeting via video conference only (and as part of a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting) to provide an opportunity for agency staff and interested members of the public to submit verbal comments on the scope of the environmental issues to be addressed in the EIR. The scoping meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 6:30 p.m. Please note the meeting link and information below:

Planning Commission Meeting
July 26, 2022 @ 6:30PM
Meeting Link -www.zoom.us
Webinar ID: 854 1805 8051
Passcode: 061787

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1659 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting
EIR for 2040 General Plan

Page 2 of 4 ends

To supplement a PC, Mac,tablet or device without audio,please join by phone at (669) 900-6833.

Use the "Raise Hand" feature in Zoom so we know you wish to speak. (If you are calling on a telephone, please press *9 to virtually raise your hand inZoom).When it is your turnto speak,City Staff will invite you.You must mute your speakers if you are watching the meeting via livestream (Youtube or City Website) or there will be feedback during the meeting. Please note that comments are limited to three minutes per speaker.

If you only wish to watch the meeting live,you can find it on our website at www.pleasanthillca.org and clicking on the large orange button labeled "Watch Meetings" or visit www.pleasanthillca.org/planningcom.

Plan Location:The Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan encompasses the entirety of the City of Pleasant Hill. Figure 1 shows the regional location,and Figure 2 shows both the Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan boundary (the City limits).

ProposedPlan:The 2040 General Plan would serve as a long-term framework forfuture growth,establish the City's eight-year housing plan from 2023 to 2031, reflect issues identified from community input and changes in State law,and update all elements of the General Plan including the Land Use and Community Design;Housing,Economic Development; Public Facilities, Services and Infrastructure; Mobility; Open Space, Parks, and Recreation; Environment;and Hazards and Safety.The update to the General Plan would include,but is not limited to,revisions to policies,narratives,data,and figures to reflect the new buildout period. The Zoning Code would also be amended to ensure consistency with the General Plan (including Housing Element).

EIR Environmental Impact Areas: The EIR will provide a programmatic evaluation of potential environmental impacts of the plan. The EIR also will evaluate the cumulative impacts of the plan when considered in conjunction with other related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. The City anticipates that the plan could result in potentially significant environmental impacts with regard to the following topic areas,which will be further evaluated in the EIR.

Aesthetics
Air Quality
Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
EIR Plan Alternatives: The EIR will also evaluate a reasonable range of plan alternatives that could reduce or avoid potential environmental effects identified in the EIR,including a required "No Plan" Alternative.

When the Draft EIR is completed,it will be available for review at the City's offices located 100 Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 and online at: https://www.pleasanthillca.org/. The City will issue a Notice of Completion and Notice of Availability of a Draft EIR at that time to inform the public and interested agencies, groups, and individuals regarding how to access the Draft EIR and provide comments. Additional information about the proposed plan can be accessed at the https://pleasanthill2040.com/ webpage and the City website at https://www.pleasanthillca.org/.

If you have questions regarding this NOP or the EIR public scoping meeting,please contact the Lead Agency Contact Troy Fujimoto at (925) 671-5209 or via email at [email protected].

Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Land Use and Planning
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and
Service Systems
Wildfire
Troy Fujimoto,City Planner Date

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1660 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting
EIR for 2040 General Plan

Page 3 of 4 ends

Figure 1 Regional Location
f§i£
S»|j
o
CQtZ,Q0ST4
c
°C, TY
r '

H A COSTA
Bay Point 0
*Mrry
illovv Pasi Rd
*0
33 Martinez o- A Navai Weapons
Station Concord
£
Concord
TT'
b
'
s V,
,
/
,
a * Kj>/rGl ^ ft
Pleasant Hill
,v
- »es
Regional
Park
Clayton
24 Lafayette
Orinda
Mount Diablo T
- State Park
T 6
^ 4
0 1.5 3 Miles Moraga
I
Imagery provided by Esrl and its licensors © 2022.

Walnut Creek quadrangle and T01N R02W502-05,08-11,14-16& T02N R02W 527,32-35. Ukiah Yuba
City
Eldorado
N«tk»r
Forest N w
|l l|City of Pleasant Hill ^
Sacramento SB
Santa Rosa
Elk Grove Vacaville
Fairfield &
Vallejo Stockton
San
francisco
*2?
Livermore
&
Modesto
San Mateo 99 Fremont
W *2'
Merced
San Jose
Los Banos 152 Santa Cruz
bU
Salinas

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1661 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting
EIR for 2040 General Plan

Page 4 of 4 ends

Figure 2 General Plan Boundary
OAK PARK BtVD
City Limits (General Plan
2040 Boundary)
QH Sphere of Influence
Highway
— Roadways
Railroad
Creek Drainage
0 0.375 0.75 N
A
I I I
Mile Source: City of Pleasant Hill, 2019.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1662 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1663 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1664 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1665 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1666 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1667 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1668 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1669 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 3ULQWHGRQ5HF\FOHG3DSHU
6(179,$(/(&7521,&0$,/
$XJXVW
0U7UR\)XMLPRWR
&LW\3ODQQHU
3OHDVDQW+LOO3ODQQLQJ'LYLVLRQ
*UHJRU\/DQH
3OHDVDQW+LOO&$

7IXLLPRWR#SOHDVDQWKLOOFDRUJ
127,&(2)35(3$5$7,212)$1(19,5210(17$/,03$&75(3257)257+( 3/($6$17+,//*(1(5$/3/$183'$7(±'$7('-8/<

67$7(&/($5,1*+286(180%(5

'HDU0U)XMLPRWR

7KH'HSDUWPHQWRI7R[LF6XEVWDQFHV&RQWURO
'76&
UHFHLYHGD1RWLFHRI3UHSDUDWLRQ

123
RIDQ(QYLURQPHQWDO,PSDFW5HSRUW
(,5
IRUWKH3OHDVDQW+LOO*HQHUDO3ODQ
8SGDWH
3URMHFW
7KH/HDG$JHQF\LVUHFHLYLQJWKLVQRWLFHIURP'76&EHFDXVHWKH 3URMHFWLQFOXGHVRQHRUPRUHRIWKHIROORZLQJ
JURXQGEUHDNLQJDFWLYLWLHVZRUNLQFORVH
SUR[LPLW\WRDURDGZD\ZRUNLQFORVHSUR[LPLW\WRPLQLQJRUVXVSHFWHGPLQLQJRUIRUPHU PLQLQJDFWLYLWLHVSUHVHQFHRIVLWHEXLOGLQJVWKDWPD\UHTXLUHGHPROLWLRQRUPRGLILFDWLRQV LPSRUWDWLRQRIEDFNILOOVRLODQGRUZRUNRQRULQFORVHSUR[LPLW\WRDQDJULFXOWXUDORU IRUPHUDJULFXOWXUDOVLWH
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

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1670 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 0U7UR\)XMLPRWR
$XJXVW
3DJH
KD]DUGRXVZDVWHIDFLOLWLHVDQGVLWHVZLWKNQRZQRUVXVSHFWHGFRQWDPLQDWLRQLVVXHVFDQ EHIRXQGRQ'76&¶V(QYLUR6WRUGDWDPDQDJHPHQWV\VWHP7KH(QYLUR6WRU0DSIHDWXUH FDQEHXVHGWRORFDWHKD]DUGRXVZDVWHIDFLOLWLHVDQGVLWHVIRUDFRXQW\FLW\RUDVSHFLILF DGGUHVV$VHDUFKZLWKLQ(QYLUR6WRULQGLFDWHVWKDWPRUHWKDQRQHKD]DUGRXVZDVWH IDFLOLWLHVDQGVLWHVDUHSUHVHQWZLWKLQWKH3URMHFW¶VUHJLRQ '76&UHFRPPHQGVWKDWWKHIROORZLQJLVVXHVEHHYDOXDWHGLQWKH+D]DUGVDQG +D]DUGRXV0DWHULDOVVHFWLRQRIWKH(,5

7KH(,5VKRXOGDFNQRZOHGJHWKHSRWHQWLDOIRUKLVWRULFRUIXWXUHDFWLYLWLHVRQRU QHDUWKH3URMHFWVLWHWRUHVXOWLQWKHUHOHDVHRIKD]DUGRXVZDVWHVVXEVWDQFHVRQ WKH3URMHFWVLWH,QLQVWDQFHVLQZKLFKUHOHDVHVKDYHRFFXUUHGRUPD\RFFXU IXUWKHUVWXGLHVVKRXOGEHFDUULHGRXWWRGHOLQHDWHWKHQDWXUHDQGH[WHQWRIWKH FRQWDPLQDWLRQDQGWKHSRWHQWLDOWKUHDWWRSXEOLFKHDOWKDQGRUWKHHQYLURQPHQW VKRXOGEHHYDOXDWHG7KH(,5VKRXOGDOVRLGHQWLI\WKHPHFKDQLVP V
WRLQLWLDWH
DQ\UHTXLUHGLQYHVWLJDWLRQDQGRUUHPHGLDWLRQDQGWKHJRYHUQPHQWDJHQF\ZKR ZLOOEHUHVSRQVLEOHIRUSURYLGLQJDSSURSULDWHUHJXODWRU\RYHUVLJKW 5HILQHUVLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVVWDUWHGDGGLQJOHDGFRPSRXQGVWRJDVROLQHLQWKH
VLQRUGHUWRERRVWRFWDQHOHYHOVDQGLPSURYHHQJLQHSHUIRUPDQFH 7KLVSUDFWLFHGLGQRWRIILFLDOO\HQGXQWLO

ZKHQOHDGZDVEDQQHGDVDIXHO
DGGLWLYHLQ&DOLIRUQLD7DLOSLSHHPLVVLRQVIURPDXWRPRELOHVXVLQJOHDGHGJDVROLQH FRQWDLQHGOHDGDQGUHVXOWHGLQDHULDOO\GHSRVLWHGOHDG $'/
EHLQJGHSRVLWHGLQ
DQGDORQJURDGZD\VWKURXJKRXWWKHVWDWH$'/FRQWDPLQDWHGVRLOVVWLOOH[LVW DORQJURDGVLGHVDQGPHGLDQVDQGFDQDOVREHIRXQGXQGHUQHDWKVRPHH[LVWLQJ URDGVXUIDFHVGXHWRSDVWFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLWLHV'XHWRWKHSRWHQWLDOIRU $'/FRQWDPLQDWHGVRLO'76&UHFRPPHQGVFROOHFWLQJVRLOVDPSOHVIRUOHDG DQDO\VLVSULRUWRSHUIRUPLQJDQ\LQWUXVLYHDFWLYLWLHVIRUWKH3URMHFWGHVFULEHGLQ WKH(,5
,IDQ\VLWHVZLWKLQWKH3URMHFWDUHDRUVLWHVORFDWHGZLWKLQWKHYLFLQLW\RIWKH3URMHFW KDYHEHHQXVHGRUDUHVXVSHFWHGRIKDYLQJEHHQXVHGIRUPLQLQJDFWLYLWLHV SURSHULQYHVWLJDWLRQIRUPLQHZDVWHVKRXOGEHGLVFXVVHGLQWKH(,5'76& UHFRPPHQGVWKDWDQ\3URMHFWVLWHVZLWKFXUUHQWDQGRUIRUPHUPLQLQJRSHUDWLRQV RQVLWHRULQWKH3URMHFWVLWHDUHDVKRXOGEHHYDOXDWHGIRUPLQHZDVWHDFFRUGLQJWR '76&¶V

$EDQGRQHG0LQH/DQG0LQHV3UHOLPLQDU\$VVHVVPHQW+DQGERRN ,IEXLOGLQJVRURWKHUVWUXFWXUHVDUHWREHGHPROLVKHGRQDQ\SURMHFWVLWHVLQFOXGHG LQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWVXUYH\VVKRXOGEHFRQGXFWHGIRUWKHSUHVHQFHRI OHDGEDVHGSDLQWVRUSURGXFWVPHUFXU\DVEHVWRVFRQWDLQLQJPDWHULDOVDQG SRO\FKORULQDWHGELSKHQ\OFDXON5HPRYDOGHPROLWLRQDQGGLVSRVDORIDQ\RIWKH DERYHPHQWLRQHGFKHPLFDOVVKRXOGEHFRQGXFWHGLQFRPSOLDQFHZLWK&DOLIRUQLD

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1671 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 0U7UR\)XMLPRWR
$XJXVW
3DJH
HQYLURQPHQWDOUHJXODWLRQVDQGSROLFLHV,QDGGLWLRQVDPSOLQJQHDUFXUUHQWDQGRU IRUPHUEXLOGLQJVVKRXOGEHFRQGXFWHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK'76&¶V ,QWHULP*XLGDQFH(YDOXDWLRQRI6FKRRO6LWHVZLWK3RWHQWLDO&RQWDPLQDWLRQIURP /HDG%DVHG3DLQW7HUPLWLFLGHVDQG(OHFWULFDO7UDQVIRUPHUV ,IDQ\SURMHFWVLQLWLDWHGDVSDUWRIWKHSURSRVHG3URMHFWUHTXLUHWKHLPSRUWDWLRQRI VRLOWREDFNILOODQ\H[FDYDWHGDUHDVSURSHUVDPSOLQJVKRXOGEHFRQGXFWHGWR HQVXUHWKDWWKHLPSRUWHGVRLOLVIUHHRIFRQWDPLQDWLRQ'76&UHFRPPHQGVWKH LPSRUWHGPDWHULDOVEHFKDUDFWHUL]HGDFFRUGLQJWR'76&¶V,QIRUPDWLRQ $GYLVRU\&OHDQ,PSRUWHG)LOO0DWHULDO ,IDQ\VLWHVLQFOXGHGDVSDUWRIWKHSURSRVHG3URMHFWKDYHEHHQXVHGIRU DJULFXOWXUDOZHHGDEDWHPHQWRUUHODWHGDFWLYLWLHVSURSHULQYHVWLJDWLRQIRU RUJDQRFKORULQDWHGSHVWLFLGHVVKRXOGEHGLVFXVVHGLQWKH(,5'76& UHFRPPHQGVWKHFXUUHQWDQGIRUPHUDJULFXOWXUDOODQGVEHHYDOXDWHGLQ DFFRUGDQFHZLWK'76&¶V ,QWHULP*XLGDQFHIRU6DPSOLQJ$JULFXOWXUDO 3URSHUWLHV
7KLUG5HYLVLRQ
'76&DSSUHFLDWHVWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRFRPPHQWRQWKH(,56KRXOG\RXQHHGDQ\ DVVLVWDQFHZLWKDQHQYLURQPHQWDOLQYHVWLJDWLRQSOHDVHYLVLW'76&¶V6LWH0LWLJDWLRQDQG 5HVWRUDWLRQ3URJUDPSDJHWRDSSO\IRUOHDGDJHQF\RYHUVLJKW$GGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQ UHJDUGLQJYROXQWDU\DJUHHPHQWVZLWK'76&FDQEHIRXQGDW'76&¶V%URZQILHOGZHEVLWH ,I\RXKDYHDQ\TXHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDW

RUYLDHPDLODW
%ULDQ0F$ORRQ#GWVFFDJRY 6LQFHUHO\
%ULDQ0F$ORRQ
3URMHFW0DQDJHU
6LWH(YDOXDWLRQDQG5HPHGLDWLRQ8QLW
6LWH0LWLJDWLRQDQG5HVWRUDWLRQ3URJUDP
'HSDUWPHQWRI7R[LF6XEVWDQFHV&RQWURO
FF

YLDHPDLO

*RYHUQRU¶V2IILFHRI3ODQQLQJ
DQG5HVHDUFK
6WDWH&OHDULQJKRXVH
6WDWH&OHDULQJKRXVH#RSUFDJRY
0U'DYH.HUHD]LV
2IILFHRI3ODQQLQJ (QYLURQPHQWDO$QDO\VLV
'HSDUWPHQWRI7R[LF6XEVWDQFHV&RQWURO
'DYH.HUHD]LV#GWVFFDJRY

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1672 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Bay Delta Region
2825 Cordelia Road, Suite 100
Fairfield, CA 94534
(707) 428-2002
www.wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
August 8, 2022
Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
100 Gregory Lane
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
[email protected] Subject: Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan, Notice of Preparation of Draft Environmental Impact Report, SCH No. 2022070095, City of Pleasant Hill, Contra Costa County
Dear Mr. Fujimoto:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Pleasant Hill Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan (Project).

CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. [Fish and Game Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) and I 802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21 070; California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a)]. CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. (ld., § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on Projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.

CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub.

Resources Code, § 21 069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW's Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) regulatory authority (Fish and Game Code, § 1600 et seq.). Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in "take" as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish and Game Code, § 2050 et seq.), related authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code will be required.

Pursuant to our jurisdiction, CDFW has provided concerns, comments, and recommendations regarding the Project herein.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1673 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 2 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Pleasant Hill (City) proposes to update the Pleasant Hill General Plan to guide citywide growth and development through the year 2040. The Project would serve as a long-term frame for future growth, establish the City’s 8-year housing plan from 2023 to 2031, reflect issues identified from community input and changes in State law, and update all elements of the General Plan including the Land Use and Community Design; Housing, Economic Development; Public Facilities, Services and Infrastructure; Mobility; Open Space, Parks, and Recreation; Environment; and Hazards and Safety.

PROJECT LOCATION
This Project encompasses the entire City of Pleasant Hill, in Contra Costa County, State of California, as defined by city boundaries.

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the following comments and recommendations to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, direct, and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY
California Endangered Species Act and Native Plant Protection Act Please be advised that a CESA Incidental Take Permit (ITP) must be obtained if the Project has the potential to result in take[1] of plants or animals listed under CESA, either during construction or over the life of the Project. Issuance of a CESA Permit is subject to CEQA documentation; the CEQA document must specify impacts, mitigation measures, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. If the Project will impact CESA listed species, early consultation is encouraged, as significant modification to the Project and mitigation measures may be required to obtain a CESA ITP.

Please note that CEQA requires a Mandatory Finding of Significance if a project is likely to substantially restrict the range or reduce the population of a threatened or endangered species (CEQA Guidelines § 15380, 15064, and 15065). Impacts must be avoided or mitigated to less-than-significant levels unless the CEQA Lead Agency makes and supports Findings of Overriding Consideration (FOC). The Lead Agency’s FOC does not eliminate the Project proponent’s obligation to comply with CESA.

[1] Take is defined in Fish and Game Code section 86 as hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt any of those activities.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1674 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 3 ends

Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
Please be advised that CDFW requires an LSA Notification, pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 1600 et seq., for any Project-related activities potentially affecting rivers, lakes, or streams, and their associated riparian habitat. Notification is required for any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow; change or use material from the bed, channel, or bank including associated riparian or wetland resources; or deposit or dispose of material where it may pass into a river, lake, or stream. Work within ephemeral streams, washes, watercourses with a subsurface flow, and floodplains are generally subject to notification requirements. CDFW, as a Responsible Agency, will consider the CEQA document for the Project and may issue an LSA Agreement. CDFW may not execute the final LSA Agreement until it has complied with CEQA as a Responsible Agency.

Migratory Birds and Raptors
Fish and Game Code, § 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 places protections on birds, their eggs, and nests. CDFW has authority over actions that may disturb or destroy active nest sites or take birds. Fully protected bird species, such as the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), may not be taken or possessed at any time (Fish and Game Code, § 3511). Additionally, migratory birds are also protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

California Environmental Quality Act
The CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.) require that the draft EIR incorporate a full Project description, including reasonably foreseeable future phases of the Project, that contains sufficient information to evaluate and review the Project’s environmental impact (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15124 & 15378). Please include a complete description of the following Project components in the Project description, as applicable:  Footprints of permanent Project features and temporarily impacted areas, such as staging areas, access routes, and high fire risk zones targeted for vegetation treatment or removal.  Land use changes that would reduce open space or agricultural land uses and increase residential or other land use involving increased development.  Area and plans for any proposed buildings/structures, ground disturbing activities, fencing, paving, stationary machinery, landscaping, vegetation treatment for fuel reduction, floodwalls or levees, and stormwater systems.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1675 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 4 ends

(describe seasonal or daily peaks in activity, if relevant), artificial lighting/light reflection, noise, traffic generation, and other features.  Construction schedule, activities, equipment, and crew sizes.

Based on the broad scope of the Project, the NOP indicates that the draft EIR may be a program EIR (CEQA Guidelines, § 15168). In this case, while program EIRs have a necessarily broad scope, CDFW recommends providing as much information related to anticipated future activities as possible. CDFW recognizes that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15152, subdivision (c), if a Lead Agency is using the tiering process in connection with an EIR or large-scale planning approval, the development of detailed, site-specific information may not be feasible and can be deferred, in many instances, until such time as the Lead Agency prepares a future environmental document. This future environmental document would cover a project of a more limited geographical scale and is appropriate if the deferred information does not prevent adequate identification of significant effects of the planning approval at hand. The CEQA Guidelines section 15168, subdivision (c)(4) states, “Where the later activities involve site-specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were within the scope of the program EIR.” Based on CEQA Guidelines section 15183.3 and associated Appendix N Checklist, and consistent with other program EIRs, CDFW recommends creating a procedure or checklist for evaluating subsequent project impacts on biological resources to determine if they are within the scope of the program EIR or if an additional environmental document is warranted. This checklist should be included as an attachment to the draft EIR. Future analysis should include all special-status species and sensitive natural communities including but not limited to species considered rare, threatened, or endangered pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, section 15380.

When used appropriately, the checklist should be accompanied by enough relevant information and reasonable inferences to support a “within the scope” of the EIR conclusion. For subsequent Project activities that may affect sensitive biological resources, a site-specific analysis should be prepared by a qualified biologist to provide the necessary supporting information. In addition, the checklist should cite the specific portions of the draft EIR, including page and section references, containing the analysis of the subsequent Project activities’ significant effects and indicate whether it incorporates all applicable mitigation measures from the draft EIR.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1676 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 5 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The draft EIR should provide sufficient information regarding the environmental setting (“baseline”) to understand the Project’s, and its alternatives (if applicable), potentially significant impacts on the environment (CEQA Guidelines, § 15125 and 15360).

CDFW recommends that the draft EIR provide baseline habitat assessments for specialstatus plant, fish, and wildlife species located and potentially located within the Project area and surrounding lands, including but not limited to all rare, threatened, or endangered species (CEQA Guidelines, § 15380). The draft EIR should also describe aquatic habitats, such as wetlands and/or waters of the U.S. or State, and any sensitive natural communities or riparian habitat occurring on or adjacent to the Project site.

Sensitive natural communities can be found here: (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/ NaturalCommunities#sensitive%20natural%20communities).

Habitat descriptions and the potential for species occurrence should include information from multiple sources, such as aerial imagery; historical and recent survey data; field reconnaissance; scientific literature and reports; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information, Planning, and Consultation System
(https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/); findings from positive occurrence databases such as the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB;
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS). SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES AND NESTING BIRDS CDFW is concerned regarding potential impacts to special-status species that may be present within the Project area, including, but not limited to, those listed below (CDFW 2022):  Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) – State Threatened (ST), Federal Threatened (FT)  California tiger salamander, central California Distinct Population Segment (Ambystoma californiense pop. 1) – ST, FT  California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) – State Species of Special Concern (SSC), FT  foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) – State Endangered (SE), proposed for listing as Threatened under FESA  giant garter snake (Thamnophis gigas) – ST, Federal Endangered (FE)  San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) – ST, FE  Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) – SSC

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1677 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 6 ends

1B.2  big tarplant (Blepharizonia plumose) – CRPR 1B.2  Contra Costa goldfields (Lasthenia conjugens) – FE  Contra Costa wallflower (Erysimum capitatum var. angustatum) – SE, FE  fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria liliacea) – CRPR 1B.2  large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora) – SE, FE  Mason’s lilaeopsis (Lilaeopsis masonii) – CRPR 1B.1  Mt. Diablo’s bird beak (Cordylanthus nidularius) – CRPR 1B.1  Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern (Calochortus pulchellus) – CRPR 1B.2  rock sanicle (Sanicula saxatilis) – CRPR 1B.2  soft bird’s beak (Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis) – FE Surveys should be conducted for special-status species with potential to occur, following recommended survey protocols. CDFW-recommended survey and monitoring protocols and guidelines for a subset of the resources listed above are available at:
(https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Survey-Protocols).

Botanical surveys for special-status plant species, including those with a California Rare Plant Rank (http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/inventory/), must be conducted during the blooming period for all species potentially impacted by the Project within the Project area and adjacent habitats that may be indirectly impacted by, for example, changes to hydrology, and require the identification of reference populations. More than one year of

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1678 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 7 ends

surveys may be necessary given environmental conditions. Please refer to CDFW protocols for surveying and evaluating impacts to rare plants, and survey reporting requirements (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants).

IMPACT ANALYSIS
Based on the data and information from the habitat assessment, the draft EIR should adequately assess which special-status species are likely to occur on or near the Project site, and whether they could be impacted by the Project. The draft EIR should also adequately analyze and discuss what measures are proposed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate for potential impacts. The draft EIR should include the reasonably foreseeable direct and indirect changes (temporary and permanent) that may occur with implementation of the Project (CEQA Guidelines, § 15126, 15126.2, and 15358). This includes, but is not limited to, evaluating and describing impacts such as:  Encroachments into and alterations to riparian habitats, wetlands, or other sensitive areas and habitats.  Potential impacts to special-status species or sensitive natural communities. This may include:
o Inadvertent entrapment or impingement;
o Permanent and temporary habitat disturbance, fragmentation, or loss; and o Loss or modification of breeding, nesting, dispersal and foraging habitat, including vegetation removal, alteration of soils and hydrology, and removal of habitat structural features (e.g., snags, rock outcrops, overhanging banks); o Loss of connectivity and/or obstruction of movement corridors, fish passage, or access to water sources and other core habitat features; o Decreased ability to reproduce or reduced reproductive/breeding success (loss or reduced health or vigor of eggs or young);
o Interference with list-species recovery plan(s);
o Permanent and temporary habitat disturbances associated with ground disturbance, noise, lighting, reflection, air pollution, traffic, or human presence resultant from the project;
o Direct mortality.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1679 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 8 ends

include, but is not limited to:
o Impacts arising from the need for new infrastructure to support Project activities, such as installation of new roads, water systems, sewage treatment facilities, or other utilities;
o Reduced groundwater infiltration due to increased impermeability from the installation of new structures, which has the potential to impact both surface and subsurface stream flows, which can deteriorate riparian habitats that can no longer access subsurface flows; create an influx of runoff during heavy rain events, which can contribute to streambank erosion; and contribute to surface water pollution, which poses a multitude of concerns for the health and biodiversity in riparian habitats.

The draft EIR should also identify reasonably foreseeable future projects in the Project vicinity, disclose any cumulative impacts associated with these projects, determine the significance of each cumulative impact, and assess the significance of the project’s contribution to the impact (CEQA Guidelines § 15355). Although a project’s impacts may be less-than-significant individually, its contributions to a cumulative impact may be considerable; a contribution to a significant cumulative impact, e.g., reduction of habitat for a special-status species should be considered cumulatively considerable.

AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Based on the comprehensive analysis of the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Project, the CEQA Guidelines direct the Lead Agency to consider and describe all feasible measures to avoid potentially significant impacts in the draft EIR and mitigation of potentially significant impacts of the Project on the environment (CEQA Guidelines, § 15021, 15063, 15071, 15126.4, and 15370). This includes a discussion of impact avoidance and minimization measures for special-status species, which are recommended to be developed in early consultation with CDFW, USFWS, and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). These measures should be incorporated as enforceable Project conditions to reduce impacts to biological resources to less-thansignificant levels. Fully protected species such as the golden eagle and the white-tailed kite may not be taken or possessed at any time (Fish and Game Code, § 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515). Therefore, the draft EIR should include measures to ensure complete avoidance of these species.

CDFW recommends that the draft EIR include development of a robust mitigation plan that will reduce the impacts of the Project to a less-than-significant level and provide benefits to local or on-site resources and species.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1680 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Mr. Troy Fujimoto
City of Pleasant Hill
August 8, 2022

Page 9 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. [Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e)]. Accordingly, please report any special-status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the CNDDB. The CNNDB field survey form can be filled out and submitted online at the following link:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals. FILING FEES The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of environmental document filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the environmental document filing fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & Game Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089).

CONCLUSION
CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the NOP to assist the City of Pleasant Hill in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources.

Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Mia Bianchi, Senior Environmental Scientist (Specialist), at (707) 815-8722 or [email protected]; or Michelle Battaglia, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisory), at (707) 339-6052 or [email protected]. Sincerely, Erin Chappell
Regional Manager
Bay Delta Region
cc: Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento

LITERATURE CITED
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Accessed August 4, 2022

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1681 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Bradley Olazo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 8:32 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Mark Boucher
Subject: NOP Comments: Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan EIR - FC District Attachments: Drainage Fee Schedule 2022.pdf
Hi Troy,
The Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (FC District) has reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Pleasant Hill (City) 2040 General Plan Update (GPU) dated July 7, 2022. We submit the following comments:

1. We request that the EIR provide a map of the watersheds within the GPU area, especially where the land use designation changes will be located. The map should include the watershed boundaries, show all existing watercourses, tributaries, and man-made drainage facilities within the project site that could be impacted by the City’s GPU and also identify the FC District’s right of way. The FC District can assist in this by providing a GIS layer of our right of way.

2. The EIR should discuss any proposed changes in density from the City’s current General Plan, and its corresponding increases in impervious surface, and discuss its effect on the existing storm drain systems and any mitigations that are necessary, such as upgrading the existing storm drain systems or constructing detention basins.

Any parcels that are currently open space, to be developed as per the proposed General Plan amendment, have the potential to create new impervious surface areas and increase runoff, which could result in erosion or capacity issues in creeks. The EIR should discuss any impacts to downstream facilities due to higher volume of runoff.

3. We recommend that the EIR stipulate that future developments should design and construct storm drain facilities to adequately collect and convey stormwater runoff, without diversion of the watershed, entering or originating within the development to the nearest natural watercourse or adequate man-made drainage facility.

4. We recommend that the adequacy and stability of the drainage facilities within the GPU area be studied to determine if local drainage design criteria are met, as well as FEMA National Floodplain Insurance requirements.

If those criteria are not met, or if there are potential capacity or erosion concerns attributable to the GPU land use changes, then the CEQA documents should discuss the potential impacts and propose mitigation measures to address those impacts. The discussion should also include an analysis of the capacity and erosion potential of the existing watercourses.

5. The City is within the Grayson Creek/Murderers Creek Watershed. We recommend that the EIR discuss any direct impacts to the creeks, their tributaries, and downstream receiving waters, resulting from future developments be mitigated.

6. The EIR should discuss the payment of drainage area fees for development within formed drainage areas as a mitigation measure. The FC District charges drainage area fees for any new impervious surfaces created within Drainage Areas 16, 44B, 46, 47, 62, 72, 78, and 89. By ordinance, all building permits or subdivision maps filed in

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1682 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2 this area are subject to the provisions of the drainage fee ordinance. Effective January 1, 2022, the current fees in these drainage areas are listed in the attached Drainage Fee Schedule per square foot of newly created impervious surface.

Please note that the FC District is not the approving local agency for projects within the City’s jurisdiction as defined by the Subdivision Map Act. As a special district, the FC District has an independent authority to collect drainage fees that is not restricted by the Subdivision Map Act. The FC District reviews the drainage fee rate every year that the ordinance is in effect and adjusts the rate annually on January 1 to account for inflation. The drainage fee rate does not vest at the time of tentative map approval. The drainage fees due and payable will be based on the fee in effect at the time of fee collection.

The FC District’s 50-year plan encourages local communities to plan for modifying flood control channels to incorporate natural features. This project provides an opportunity to implement restoration enhancement for Grayson and Murderers creeks. We recommend that all future projects and developments, as applicable, be conditioned to implement restoration activities to improve habitat value and migration. For reference, the FC District’s 50-year plan is linked below:
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6853/50---Year-Plan-3-20-09-BOS-compressedPDF?bidId=\

7. We recommend that the EIR request the appropriate environmental regulatory agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, to explore the permits, special conditions, and mitigation that may be necessary for this project.

8. The EIR should discuss how the GPU will comply with the current NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) requirements under the City’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinances and the C.3 Guidebook.

9. The FC District should be included in the review of all drainage facilities that have a region-wide benefit, that impact region-wide facilities, or that impact FC District-owned facilities. The FC District is available to provide technical assistance to the City in their update efforts under our Fee-for-Service program.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the NOP for the 2040 General Plan Update and look forward to reviewing the EIR. If you have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience.

Thanks,
Brad Olazo
Contra Costa County Public Works: Flood Control
255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, CA 94553
p: 925.313.2308 | e: [email protected] | cccpublicworks.org

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1683 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) ´3URYLGHDVDIHDQGUHOLDEOHWUDQVSRUWDWLRQQHWZRUNWKDWVHUYHVDOOSHRSOHDQGUHVSHFWVWKHHQYLURQPHQWµ ',675,&7
2)),&( 2) 75$16,7 $1' &20081,7< 3/$11,1*
32%2;06²'_2$./$1'&$

ZZZGRWFDJRY
$XJXVW 6&+

*76
&&
*76,'

&R5W3P
&&9$59$5
7UR\)XMLPRWR&LW\3ODQQHU
&LW\RI3OHDVDQW+LOO
*UHJRU\/DQH
3OHDVDQW+LOO&$

5H
3OHDVDQW+LOO*HQHUDO3ODQ1RWLFHRI3UHSDUDWLRQ 123
IRU'UDIW(QYLURQPHQWDO
,PSDFW5HSRUW
'(,5

'HDU7UR\)XMLPRWR

7KDQN\RXIRULQFOXGLQJWKH&DOLIRUQLD'HSDUWPHQWRI7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ &DOWUDQV
LQWKH
HQYLURQPHQWDOUHYLHZSURFHVVIRUWKH3OHDVDQW+LOO*HQHUDO3ODQ3URMHFW:HDUH FRPPLWWHGWRHQVXULQJWKDWLPSDFWVWRWKH6WDWH·VPXOWLPRGDOWUDQVSRUWDWLRQV\VWHP DQGWRRXUQDWXUDOHQYLURQPHQWDUHLGHQWLILHGDQGPLWLJDWHGWRVXSSRUWDVDIH VXVWDLQDEOHLQWHJUDWHGDQGHIILFLHQWWUDQVSRUWDWLRQV\VWHP7KHIROORZLQJFRPPHQWV DUHEDVHGRQRXUUHYLHZRIWKH-XO\123
3URMHFW8QGHUVWDQGLQJ
7KH*HQHUDO3ODQZRXOGVHUYHDVDORQJWHUPIUDPHZRUNIRUIXWXUHJURZWK HVWDEOLVKWKH&LW\·VHLJKW\HDUKRXVLQJSODQIURPWRUHIOHFWLVVXHVLGHQWLILHG IURPFRPPXQLW\LQSXWDQGFKDQJHVLQ6WDWHODZDQGXSGDWHDOOHOHPHQWVRIWKH *HQHUDO3ODQLQFOXGLQJWKH/DQG8VHDQG&RPPXQLW\'HVLJQ +RXVLQJ(FRQRPLF
'HYHORSPHQW
3XEOLF)DFLOLWLHV6HUYLFHVDQG,QIUDVWUXFWXUH
0RELOLW\
2SHQ6SDFH
3DUNVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ
(QYLURQPHQW
DQG+D]DUGVDQG6DIHW\HOHPHQWV7KHXSGDWHWR
WKH*HQHUDO3ODQZRXOGLQFOXGHEXWLVQRWOLPLWHGWRUHYLVLRQVWRSROLFLHVQDUUDWLYHV GDWDDQGILJXUHVWRUHIOHFWWKHQHZEXLOGRXWSHULRG7KH=RQLQJ&RGHZRXOGDOVREH DPHQGHGWRHQVXUHFRQVLVWHQF\ZLWKWKH*HQHUDO3ODQ
LQFOXGLQJWKH+RXVLQJ
(OHPHQW

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1684 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 7UR\)XMLPRWR&LW\3ODQQHU
$XJXVW
3DJH
´3URYLGHDVDIHDQGUHOLDEOHWUDQVSRUWDWLRQQHWZRUNWKDWVHUYHVDOOSHRSOHDQGUHVSHFWVWKHHQYLURQPHQWµ 7UDYHO'HPDQG$QDO\VLV
:LWKWKHHQDFWPHQWRI6HQDWH%LOO
6%
&DOWUDQVLVIRFXVHGRQPD[LPL]LQJHIILFLHQW
GHYHORSPHQWSDWWHUQVLQQRYDWLYHWUDYHOGHPDQGUHGXFWLRQVWUDWHJLHVDQG PXOWLPRGDOLPSURYHPHQWV)RUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQRQKRZ&DOWUDQVDVVHVVHV 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ,PSDFW6WXGLHVSOHDVHUHYLHZ&DOWUDQV·7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ,PSDFW6WXG\ *XLGH
OLQNͿ͘3OHDVHQRWHWKDWFXUUHQWDQGIXWXUHODQGXVHSURMHFWVSURSRVHGQHDUDQG DGMDFHQWWRWKH6WDWH7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ1HWZRUN
671
PD\EHDVVHVVHGLQSDUWWKURXJK
WKH7,6*
$GGLWLRQDOO\&DOWUDQVUHTXHVWVWKDWWKH&LW\RI3OHDVDQW+LOO*HQHUDO3ODQ8SGDWHLV FRQVLVWHQWZLWK&DOLIRUQLD*RYHUQPHQW&RGH6HFWLRQ RQJHVWLRQ
0DQDJHPHQW
$VZHOOWKH&LW\LVUHTXHVWHGWRJDLQDGHWHUPLQDWLRQRIFRQIRUPLW\IURPWKH&RQWUD &RVWD7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ$XWKRULW\WRGHWHUPLQHWKDWWKH&LW\RI3OHDVDQW+LOO*HQHUDO3ODQ 8SGDWHLVFRQVLVWHQWZLWKDQGFRQIRUPVWRWKH5HJLRQDO7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ3ODQ &RQVLVWHQF\5HTXLUHPHQWVRIWKH&RXQW\·V&RQJHVWLRQ0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ &03

7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ,PSDFW)HHV
:HHQFRXUDJHDVXIILFLHQWDOORFDWLRQRIIDLUVKDUHFRQWULEXWLRQVWRZDUGPXOWLPRGDO DQGUHJLRQDOWUDQVLWLPSURYHPHQWVWRIXOO\PLWLJDWHFXPXODWLYHLPSDFWVWRUHJLRQDO WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ:HDOVRVWURQJO\VXSSRUWPHDVXUHVWRLQFUHDVHVXVWDLQDEOHPRGH VKDUHVWKHUHE\UHGXFLQJ9HKLFOH0LOHV7UDYHOHG
907
&DOWUDQVZHOFRPHVWKH
RSSRUWXQLW\WRZRUNZLWKWKH&LW\DQGORFDOSDUWQHUVWRVHFXUHWKHIXQGLQJIRUQHHGHG PLWLJDWLRQ7UDIILFPLWLJDWLRQRUFRRSHUDWLYHDJUHHPHQWVDUHH[DPSOHVRIVXFK PHDVXUHV
/HDG$JHQF\
$VWKH/HDG$JHQF\WKH&LW\RI3OHDVDQW+LOOLVUHVSRQVLEOHIRUDOOSURMHFWPLWLJDWLRQ LQFOXGLQJDQ\QHHGHGLPSURYHPHQWVWRWKH6717KHSURMHFW·VIDLUVKDUHFRQWULEXWLRQ ILQDQFLQJVFKHGXOLQJLPSOHPHQWDWLRQUHVSRQVLELOLWLHVDQGOHDGDJHQF\PRQLWRULQJ VKRXOGEHIXOO\GLVFXVVHGIRUDOOSURSRVHGPLWLJDWLRQPHDVXUHV (TXLWDEOH$FFHVV ,IDQ\&DOWUDQVIDFLOLWLHVDUHLPSDFWHGE\WKHSURMHFWWKRVHIDFLOLWLHVPXVWPHHW $PHULFDQ'LVDELOLWLHV$FW
$'$
6WDQGDUGVDIWHUSURMHFWFRPSOHWLRQ$VZHOOWKH
SURMHFWPXVWPDLQWDLQELF\FOHDQGSHGHVWULDQDFFHVVGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQ7KHVH DFFHVVFRQVLGHUDWLRQVVXSSRUW&DOWUDQV·HTXLW\PLVVLRQWRSURYLGHDVDIHVXVWDLQDEOH DQGHTXLWDEOHWUDQVSRUWDWLRQQHWZRUNIRUDOOXVHUV

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1685 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 7UR\)XMLPRWR&LW\3ODQQHU
$XJXVW
3DJH
´3URYLGHDVDIHDQGUHOLDEOHWUDQVSRUWDWLRQQHWZRUNWKDWVHUYHVDOOSHRSOHDQGUHVSHFWVWKHHQYLURQPHQWµ 7KDQN\RXDJDLQIRULQFOXGLQJ&DOWUDQVLQWKHHQYLURQPHQWDOUHYLHZSURFHVV6KRXOG \RXKDYHDQ\TXHVWLRQVUHJDUGLQJWKLVOHWWHURUIRUIXWXUHQRWLILFDWLRQVDQGUHTXHVWVIRU UHYLHZRIQHZSURMHFWVSOHDVHHPDLO/'5'#GRWFDJRY 6LQFHUHO\ 0$5./(21*
'LVWULFW%UDQFK&KLHI
/RFDO'HYHORSPHQW5HYLHZ
F
6WDWH&OHDULQJKRXVH

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1686 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Norman <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 3:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Development Concepts Mangini / Delu Sites
Hi Troy, a few concepts for the Mangini / Delu Site,
Thanks, Norm

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1687 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2 4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1688 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 3 Retail / Housing Mix

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1689 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 4 4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1690 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 5 Incorporation of education/ housing and retail.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1691 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 6 4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1692 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 7 Mangini / Delu Plaza

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1693 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 8 4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1694 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 9 European Comcept

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1695 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 10 4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1696 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 11 Theater Venue.

Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1697 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Norman <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 10:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Mangini / Delu Site
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:

From: Norman <[email protected]>
Date: July 21, 2022 at 10:39:37 AM PDT
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Mangini / Delu Site
July 21, 2022
Norman Vanhole
10 Wildwood Place
Pleasant Hill, CA. 94523

City of Pleasant Hill Public Works and Community Development Departments 100 Gregory Lane
Pleasant Hill, CA. 94523
Att: Troy Fujimoto,
City Planner
Dear Mr. Fujimoto,
Subject: Mangini /Delu Future Development
At which time a Site Specific EIR is to be prepared, please request the Preparer to address the following Alternate concept for the above referenced site.
1) Pleasant Hill is now more than ever a
city that relies on sale tax revenue to
pay its’ expenses.

The Mangini / Delu properties are an
ideal site for a Mixed Use Development,

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1698 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2 including Retail space and housing
opportunities and with the addition of
the PH Park & Recreation District
parcel would be an ideal addition for
the use of the Pleasant Hill community
and others.

A Plan such as was proposed prior to
the now Developed CarMax site which
was submitted as the Campus Site Plan,
with modification would be ideal for
this site.
2) This plan had a reasonable mix of
apartments, housing and retail, etc.

Mangini / Delu site could not be more
suitable for such a development as that
of Campus Site Plan, which had a
suggested use of a Whole Foods Store
as an anchor, followed by other retail
uses, mixed use of housing an
apartments and offices mixed in with
the retail tenants. The plan also
included upgrading the existing park
and the addition of bike and pedestrian
trails along a section of the perimeter of
the development.
( I knew Lou Mangini for many years
and served with him on the PH Planning
Commission and this was the sort of a
development he envisioned for the
“Mangini Ranch”).
3) The development of the Mangini /
Delu site could carry on the tradition by
have a “tractional” Produce Stand”
incorporate in it.

Please ask the City to retrieve the file
for the DVC Campus Site Plan and
submit it to the EIR preparer for,
hopefully review for a more appropriate
Site Specific Development Plan for the
Mangini / Delu site than high density
“cooker cutter” housing.

Also I might add, the alternate
suggested above will bring in more sales
tax revenue to our City in the long run.

Sincerely,

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1699 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 3 Norman Vanhole, former Pleasant Hill
City Planning Commissioner
Ph:925 933 5977
Photo (CSP) send in separate E mail.

Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1700 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Norm Scheel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2022 5:15 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Housing Element- Pleasant Hill
Attachments: Pleasant Hill- Proposed for Housing Element.pdf Good Afternoon,
I was curious if there is a revised or final Summary of Proposed Housing sites available? The attached is from GPAC #15 and I see from the City website GPAC 19 is schedule for June 29, 2022.

Thank you and I look forward to hearing back.

Norman Scheel
Principal
The Hoffman Company
18881 Von Karman Ave
Suite 150
Irvine, CA 92612
(949) 553-2020 ext. 232
(949) 705-0932 Direct
(949) 553-8449 Fax
(714) 325-8246 Mobile
DRE # 00999403
www.hoffmanland.com
DRE #01473762

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1701 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
1 A. DVC Overflow Parking Lot
Size 5 acres of 11-acre site
Proposed Designation Mixed Use Very High
Assumed density 70 - 100 du/ac (70 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 350 units
Issues
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Potential for increased density (designation changed to Mixed Use Very High)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1702 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
2 D. Mangini-Delu Area
Size 25.90 acres
Assumed densities 4.8 du/ac (eastern section)

8.3 du/ac (northern section)

21.0 du/ac (southern section)
Housing Units 51 units (eastern section)
81 units (northern section)
85 units (southern section)
210 total units
(assumes 7 houses removed)
Issues • Includes existing homes
• Will require program for relocation
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• East section to SF High Density

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1703 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
3 E. JFK University
Size 4.87 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use Very High Density
Assumed density 70 - 100 du/ac (70 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 243 units
Issues • Directly adjacent to highway
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Consider 70-100 du/ac MU on this site

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1704 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
4 F. ACE Hardware
Size 1.53 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 53 units
Issues • Removed 1530 Contra Costa Blvd. based on owner request (acreage has been adjusted accordingly)
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Extend site area north to include Tap Plastics site
(acreage has been adjusted accordingly)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1705 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
5 G. Gregory Gardens
Size 3.59 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 126 units
Issues • Shallow site
• Existing active uses
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Review lease agreements

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1706 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
6 I. Pleasant Hill/Gregory Lane Intersection
Size 4.93 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 172 units
Issues • Walgreens and 7-11 sites removed based on owner requests (acreage has been adjusted accordingly)
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Consider sites south of Gregory and select sites within this area (acreage has been adjusted accordingly)
• Consider 40-70 du/ac MU designation for this site

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1707 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
7 J. Gregory Lane/Contra Costa Boulevard Intersection
Size 7.07 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 247 units
Issues • 1817 Contra Costa Boulevard removed based on owner request (acreage has been adjusted accordingly)
GPAC
Recommendation
• Keep in inventory
• Extend the focus area boundary north to Caspers
(acreage has been adjusted accordingly)
• Potential site for brewery or brew pub
• Consider 40-70 du/ac Mixed Use

GREGORY LANE

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1708 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
8 K. Jewel Lane Neighborhood
Size 1.82 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 58 total units (assumes 7 houses removed) Issues • Includes existing homes
• Will require program to address family relocation
• 2571 and 2583 Jewel Lane removed based on letters from owners (acreage has been adjusted accordingly)
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Expand the focus area to Include the L-shaped building to the east (acreage has been adjusted accordingly)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1709 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
9 M. Monument Triangle Area
Size 4.5 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 159 units
Issues
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Exclude mobile home park (acreage has been adjusted
accordingly)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1710 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
10 N. Former JC Penny Furniture Store
Size 5.75 acres
Proposed Designation Mixed Use High Density
Assumed density 40 - 70 du/ac (49 du/ac assumed)
Housing Units 232 units
Issues
GPAC Recommendation • Keep in inventory
• Consider to 40-70 du/ac Mixed Use in this area.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1711 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill – GPAC #15
Attachment A – Summary of Proposed Housing Sites
11 Summary of Opportunity Sites by GPAC Recommended Land Use Designation Acres
Dwelling Units Income
Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Category
Residential
Single-Family Low Density 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Above Mod
Single-Family Medium Density 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Above Mod Single-Family High Density 11.33 44.00 7.00 51 Above Mod Multi-Family Very Low Density 10.32 57.00 24.00 81 Above Mod Multi-Family Low Density 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Above Mod
Multi-Family Medium Density 4.25 0.00 85.00 85 Above Mod Multi-Family High Density 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Moderate
Commercial and Mixed-Use
Commercial and Retail 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 n/a
Mixed Use 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Moderate
Mixed Use Neighborhood 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Moderate
Mixed Use High Density 30.14 0.00 1,052.00 1,052 Lower
Mixed Use Very High Density 15.86 0.00 593.00 593 Lower Total 71.90 101.00 1761.00 1862

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1712 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Bushra Toma <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 6:06 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: General Plan-EIR
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. I would ask the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

I would ask that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, I would also ask the City to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, I expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient offstreet parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Thanks for your continued participation in the process and we will alert you when we get more meeting specifics.

Bushra Toma
Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1713 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Judy Q-Orpin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 8:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mangini/Delu property development
Dear Mr. Fujimoto,
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Sincerely,
Judy Geringer
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1714 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Sean Grech <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 8:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: City plan
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Sincerely,
Sean Grech
Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1715 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Pamela Reid <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 4:27 PM
To: [email protected]
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Thanks for your continued participation in the process and we will alert you when we get more meeting specifics.

Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1716 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Leslie Trejo
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2022 9:43 AM
To: Leslie Trejo
Subject: FW: [EXT] FW: Mangini/Delu Site, Pleasant Hill From: Eileen Mascaro <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 10:17 AM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Subject: Mangini/Delu Site, Pleasant Hill
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Eileen Mascaro, a 51-year resident of Erin Court, Pleasant Hill.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1717 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Pete Sabine (925) 787-2548 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 8:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: General Plan Update - EIR Scoping - letter attached Attachments: General Plan Update - EIR Scoping.pdf
Troy Fujimoto,
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed City of Pleasant Hill General Plan Update. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and greenhouse gases in Pleasant Hill. I am asking the City of Pleasant Hill to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

I am asking that the City of Pleasant Hill preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, I am also asking the City of Pleasant Hill to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, I expect the City of Pleasant Hill to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of housing units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Respectfully,
Pete Sabine
219 Apollo Way
Pleasant Hill
925.787.2548
[email protected]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1718 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) :ƵůǇϮϲ͕ϮϬϮϮ
dƌŽǇ&ƵũŝŵŽƚŽ
WƌŽũĞĐƚWůĂŶŶĞƌ
ŝƚǇŽĨWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůů
WůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ
/ĂŵǁƌŝƚŝŶŐƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚŝƚǇŽĨWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůů'ĞŶĞƌĂůWůĂŶhƉĚĂƚĞ͘tŚŝůĞ/ ƌĞĐŽŐŶŝǌĞƚŚĞŶĞĞĚĨŽƌĨƵƌƚŚĞƌŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕/ŚĂǀĞƐĞǀĞƌĂůĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐ͘ /ĂŵĐŽŶĐĞƌŶĞĚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶŽĨŚŽƵƐŝŶŐǁŝůůŚĂǀĞĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĚ ŐƌĞĞŶŚŽƵƐĞŐĂƐĞƐŝŶWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůů͘/ĂŵĂƐŬŝŶŐƚŚĞŝƚǇŽĨWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůůƚŽĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĂďĂƐĞůŝŶĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ ƐƵƌǀĞǇĨŽƌĂůůŵĂũŽƌƐƚƌĞĞƚƐĂŶĚŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŶĞǁĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŽĂǀŽŝĚŽƌŵŝƚŝŐĂƚĞ ƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĚĞƚĞƌŝŽƌĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞĨƵƚƵƌĞ͘
/ĂŵĂƐŬŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŝƚǇŽĨWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůůƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĞŽƉĞŶƐƉĂĐĞĂŶĚďŝŽůŽŐŝĐĂůůǇƐĞŶƐŝƚŝǀĞŚĂďŝƚĂƚƐ͕ ƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌůǇĐƌĞĞŬĐŽƌƌŝĚŽƌƐ͘ƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚŝƐ͕/ĂŵĂůƐŽĂƐŬŝŶŐƚŚĞŝƚǇŽĨ WůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůůƚŽĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂĚĚŝŶŐ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƉĂƌŬƐƉĂĐĞĨŽƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐƚŽĞŶũŽǇ
>ĂƐƚůǇ͕/ĞǆƉĞĐƚƚŚĞŝƚǇŽĨWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůůƚŽŚŽŶŽƌŝƚƐƉůĞĚŐĞƚŽĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĂDĂƐƚĞƌWůĂŶĨŽƌƚŚĞ DĂŶŐŝŶŝͬĞůƵƐŝƚĞĂŶĚƚŽŚŽŶŽƌŝƚƐĐŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƚŽĂĚĚƌĞƐƐƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐĨŽƌĂĐĂƉŽŶƚŚĞŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ ŚŽƵƐŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐĂůůŽǁĞĚ͕ĂůŝŵŝƚŽŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŚĞŝŐŚƚĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐ͕Ă ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐƵĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƚŽƉƌĞǀĞŶƚƐƉŝůůͲŽǀĞƌƚŽĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚƐ͕ ĐƌĞĞŬƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĂŶĚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŵŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶƚŽƉƌĞǀĞŶƚƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĚĞƚĞƌŝŽƌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĨůŽǁ͘ ZĞƐƉĞĐƚĨƵ
WĞƚĞ^ĂďŝŶĞ
ϮϭϵƉŽůůŽtĂǇ
WůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůů
ϵϮϱ͘ϳϴϳ͘Ϯϱϰ
WĞƚĞΛWĞƚĞ^ĂďŝŶĞ͘Đ

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1719 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Shereen Motarjemi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 3:57 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: GP comment
Mr. Fujimoto,
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. I am asking the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

I am asking that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, I am also asking the City to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, I expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of housing units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient offstreet parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Shereen Motarjemi
100 Mercury Way

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1720 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Catherine Boccellari <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 2:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Comment to the Proposed General Plan
Mr. Fujimoto,
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Best,
Catherine Boccellari
Pleasant Hill resident

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1721 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: John Walter <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:33 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Pleasant Hill, CA General Plan Meeting Comment Dear Pleasant Hill Mayor, Council Members, General Plan Committee, and Housing Element Committee,
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed Pleasant Hill, CA General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns about the currently developed General Plan. I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic, parking, open space and emissions in the City.

I would ask the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future. As part of this, I would also ask the City to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

In keeping with the existing character of the City, I would ask that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors.

In summary, I expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow and an effort to limit emissions.

Best Regards,
John
John S. Walter
240 Linda Lane
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
M - 925-457-9092
e-mail - [email protected]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1722 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Storey / Gianakos <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:43 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Future Mancini Property Development
Hello Mr Fujimoto,
I am a long time resident in the strip between Al Lippincott’s vineyard and Louis Mangini’s property. After Dr.

Lippincott’s death, it was agreed with the developer not to open Malaga Way to through traffic. This has turned out to be a great benefit to the neighborhood. I wish to make the same case for not opening the other end of Malaga into the Mangini property. The preservation of minimal traffic circulation has contributed to pedestrian safety as we have no sidewalks and limited night time illumination.

I remember some years ago, on another issue, complimenting you for being a conscientious civil servant. I trust you are still that same person.

Most sincerely, Nick Gianakos, 19 Tokay Ct.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1723 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: David Blau <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 1:42 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto
Cc: Bruce Irion; Annette Gelinas; Shereen Motarjemi
Subject: Comments on the Proposed General Plan & Upcoming EIR Hello Troy & Planning Commission:

I will be making specific comments Tuesday night regarding the scope & content of the upcoming Draft EIR. Below are related concerns regarding the Draft General Plan:

We are writing to provide comment on the proposed General Plan. While we recognize the need for further housing development, we have several serious concerns.

We are concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic levels, congestion, & greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) in the City. We ask that the City establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future. We also would like to see a calculation of additional vehicles miles traveled (VMT) for each candidate site under consideration.

We ask that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, we also ask the City to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, we expect the City to honor its pledge to prepare a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address residents’ concerns for a cap or upper limit on the number of units allowed; a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods; a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods; creek preservation across the entire site; and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow at all nearby intersections.

David & Jennifer Blau
75 Exeter Lane
Pleasant Hill, Ca. (family resides @ Victoria Crossings for 42 yrs) [email protected]
(c) 925-381-4839

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1724 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 1:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mangini-Delu property
Dear City Council and City Planners of Pleasant Hill:,
As a resident / homeowner living very near Mangini’s for over 60 years, I am concerned that this issue will not get the full attention and time needed to assure us residents that it is done correctly and not pushed through swiftly.

I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Lastly, I expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of housing units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Thank you for your time and effort,
Lesley
Lesley Stiles
Chef / Owner Roxx on Main
[email protected]
www.roxxonmain.com
925 370 ROXX (7699)
Real Food. Cocktails. Wine. Great Music
We Cater All Occasions
925 323 3230 cell
www.lesleystilesfoods.com
Do You Know Where Your Food Comes From?

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1725 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Jim Whitsett <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 1:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Shereen Motarjemi; David Blau; Lenore Krause; Bruce Irion Subject: Planning Commission EIR Scoping Meeting: Public Comment on General Plan Troy F. and Members of the 'Planning' Commission:

Reference our email to you of May 15, 2022 SUBJ: Mangini/Delu Property Development We are writing once again to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While we recognize the need for further housing development, we have several concerns.

We remain concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and resultant increases in greenhouse gases in the City. We would ask the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

We also would ask that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, we would also ask the City to consider adding additional open park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, we expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Time for the 'Planning' Commission to start listening to the citizens regarding LOCAL ZONING OPTIONS. Thank You.

Jim and Sally Whitsett
598 Maureen Ln
Pleasant Hill
PH RESIDENTS SINCE 1993

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1726 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Lisa Hutchinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 5:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: plan
I am writing to provide a comment on the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

John and Lisa Hutchinson
267 Apollo Way
PH, CA 94523

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1727 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Debbie Cotton <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2022 2:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Responsible development in Pleasant Hill
Dear Mr. Fujimoto,
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Sincerely,
Debbie Cotton
Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1728 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Karen Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 8:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mangini/Delu site
I would like to offer my input on regards to the proposed General Plan. I realize there is a need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic in the City. I would ask the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

Thank you for your time,

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1729 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 6:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Comments to General Plan (Mangini/Delu and the Environmental Impact Report) We are writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

We are concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. We are asking the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration int he future.

We are asking that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, we are also asking the City to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, we expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of housing units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

City Council members voted to preserve "flexibility" for future evaluation and revisions to the existing General Plan. Flexibility is an open-ended scenario with the potential of drastically changing the character of adjacent existing neighborhoods along with burdening our already over-crowded roads. High density housing projects belong near public transit and major highways designed to handle the impact of large scale development.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

Regards,
Alice and Jeff Smith

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1730 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Amy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 12:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: comments on proposed General Plan from a resident As a Pleasant Hill resident of over 23 years, I am providing comments on the proposed General Plan. I have several concerns while also recognizing the need for housing development. My first concern is that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. I am asking the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate their impact on traffic flow. My second concern is that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, I am also asking the City to consider adding additional park or open space for residents to enjoy and for the preservation of natural resources for native plants and animals to continue to use. My third concern is that the City honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site. I request that the city honor its commitment to address resident concerns for:
 a cap on the number of housing units allowed,
 a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods,  a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods,  specific plans to preserve the creek on the property (including measures to protect the native plants and animals which use the creek), and
 traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Best regards,
Amy Arcus-Arth
3 Dublin Court, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
[email protected]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1731 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 12:28 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: NOP Comment: 2040 General Plan EIR
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Bruce Irion
265 Linda Ln, PH

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1732 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: DARREN HALL <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 10:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mangini
As a thirty year Pleasant Hill resident, and homeowner in the Valley High area, I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

Lastly, I expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of housing units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Sincerely,
Darren C. Hall
Sent from AT&T Yahoo Mail on Android

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1733 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: David Blau <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 1, 2022 8:40 AM
To: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: Written Comments on the CEQA Scoping Process
Good morning, Troy. Here are my written comments on the CEQA Scoping Process. Please provide these to the members of the Planning Commission overseeing the preparation of the EIR on the General Plan as well as to your environmental consultant, RINCON.

Comments:

1. The Notice of Preparation was as thin as one could be. No description of the proposed action nor characterization of the alternatives was provided. The list of potential impact topics was the standard list of 18 with no distinction of what might be relevant to this EIR. Why list so many non-environmental impact topics? It just confuses the public. As a result, you have not given the agencies and general public anything to react to and comment on.

2. We are told that there will not be a Scoping Report issued, which means we have to wait until early 2023 to see how our comments during Scoping might be addressed. Typically a Scoping Report is prepared early in the EIR process so that stakeholders can see how the EIR consultant will be addressing their comments during the preparation of the Draft EIR.

3. The NOP makes no mention of the “reasonable range of alternatives” required by CEQA. The 2003 General Plan presented three alternative “themes” in the Alternatives Chapter: (1) economic intensification, (2) residential infill, and (3) reduced density. You have given us no indication of what alternatives might be presented in this EIR and how this might be helpful in arriving at the preferred action.

4. We would like to see a thorough analysis of the “No Action Alternative”, also mandated by CEQA, and the consequences to the CIty if no action is taken. During numerous GPAC hearings, the CIty has said that if an aggressive housing program is not implemented within the next eight years, the State can withhold funding for various programs and can even take over implementation of the housing program. We haven’t seen any evidence of this taking place.

Please describe this scenario in detail.

5. We want to see a detailed analysis of traffic and GHG impacts along with proposed mitigation measures to lessen impacts. This is perhaps the most serious impact of all. We want to see analysis of the “Level of Service” (LOS) at nearby intersections for each proposed housing site and do not want to see degradation of LOS with increased wait times and massive congestion. We want to see calculations of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for each proposed housing site, examining likely distances to work and shopping.

6. Lastly, CEQA requires the identification of the “Environmentally Superior Alternative”. We are especially interested in seeing this analysis, understanding the basis for this distinction, and whether the City intends to select this alternative or not.

Thank you,
David Blau
75 Exeter Lane
Victoria Crossing resident w family for 42 years Pleasant Hill, Ca.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1734 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2 Sent from my iPhone

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1735 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Marian Crompton <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 9:41 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mangini/Delu property
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1736 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Martin Gibb <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 7:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: General Plan Comments
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on resources (i.e. water), traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. I would ask the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

Martin Gibb
Pleasant Hill Resident

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1737 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Karen Panico <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2022 7:54 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: General Plan Comments
I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns.

I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on resources (water), traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. I would ask the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future.

Karen Panico
Pleasant Hill Resident

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1738 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Alan Bade <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 5:22 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Comments on GP NOP EIR Scope
Attachments: 50 - Year Plan 3-20-09 BOS compressed.PDF
Dear Planning Commission,
I'm writing to follow up on our verbal comments during the scoping session for the new General Plan EIR. In our comments, we advocated for the City to incorporate the Contra Costa Flood Control Agency's "50 Year Plan" into the new GP. This plan provides a roadmap for a new way of looking at flood control, one that favors restoration to more natural creeks whenever possible. As we develop the last remaining vacant lands in Pleasant Hill, the principles articulated in the document will make for a much better outcome.

The "50 Year Plan" specifically mentions that the principles should be included into new General Plans as they get updated. Pleasant Hill has creek sections that could greatly benefit from this new approach. It will be beneficial to add policies and goals in support of it.

Attached is a copy of the document for the Planning Commission, the GPAC Committee, and the GP consultants to review, plus a link to the CC Flood Control Agency document page where it is found: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/5745/Documents-and-Standards Thank you, Alan Bade
Pleasant Hill resident

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1739 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Cindy Rubin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 5:23 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: Mangini/Delau Development on tonight's agenda
Hello Troy and the PH Planning Dept.- I apologize for the lateness of this email regarding tonight's meeting.

I am writing because I am at a loss to understand how customers of CCWD are being told to reduce our water usage by 15%, but there is apparently enough water for new homes in the area. That is a huge concern, as well as the traffic impact and loss of open space.

I hope that whatever the planning dept decides, it is done to comply with the goals of the PH Master Plan and the recognition of our limited resources in CA.

Thank you,
Cindy Rubin

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1740 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Cindy Rubin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 5:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mangini Farms Development on Agenda 7/26/22
Hello PH Planning Dept.- I apologize for the lateness of this email regarding tonight's meeting.

I hope that whatever the planning dept decides, it is done to comply with the goals of the PH Master Plan and the recognition of our limited resources in CA.

Thank you,
Cindy Rubin

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1741 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1 Leslie Trejo
From: Katie Hindt <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 4:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Magnini/Delu site
Dear City of Pleasant Hill:

I am writing to provide comment to the proposed General Plan. While I recognize the need for further housing development, I have several concerns. I am concerned that the proposed addition of housing will have a significant impact on traffic and greenhouse gases in the City. I am asking the City to establish a baseline traffic survey for all major streets and intersections and require new development to avoid or mitigate significant deterioration in the future. I am asking that the City preserve open space and biologically sensitive habitats, particularly creek corridors. As part of this, I am also asking the City to consider adding additional park space for residents to enjoy.

Lastly, I expect the City to honor its pledge to conduct a Master Plan for the Mangini/Delu site and to honor its commitment to address resident concerns for a cap on the number of housing units allowed, a limit on building height consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, a requirement to provide sufficient off-street parking to prevent spill-over to adjacent neighborhoods, creek preservation, and traffic mitigation to prevent significant deterioration of traffic flow.

Best regards,
Katie Hindt
1955 Rose Ln, PH

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1742 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) David Blau
- Focus on LU, POP, GHG, TRA as most concerned to him
- Range of alternatives or themes that will be evaluated - Full analysis of no project and consequences to the city - Detailed analysis of GHG and TRA impacts. Mitigation for each housing site - VMT for each site that assumes distances to jobs and shopping and importantly, LOS Mangini/Delu deleted from HE because of concerns from neighbors and a promise of a Master Plan. Why is it still in LU? -
- Summarize schedule
Bruce Irion
- Recognize need for housing
- TRA and GHG are most concerning - Review of traffic intersections - Habitat and wildlife preservation and wildlife shows up in unexpected places GP provisions preserve OS and parks but largely deal with new development and not so much maintenance and redevelopment
○ What the impact of the GP would be on wildlife OS - Parks and OS - no new parks or OS. Existing are well utilized but new development would increase use of those parks. EIR should look at parks and OS. Consider adding new areas - Alan Bade - Cofounder of Grayson Creek group - Add to scope of GP is recognition that we as a City fit in the context of the entire watershed CC county has adopted 50 year plan for infrastructure replacement as it becomes outdated. Reads excerpt of plan
-
- Would like to see study in the EIR - Watershed plan - participating in development. Urges PH to participate Wendy Gollop
- Plan deals with returning creeks to a more native state. Deals with watersheds Rezoning quite a bit to multi-use and mixed-use which includes commercial and neighborhoods living close to each other. -
- Deal with a lot of truck idling and emissions from that and noise GP will look more at truck traffic and commercial vehicles including pollution. Delivery schedules to new developing mixed use groups in close proximity to where people will live -
- Noise being close to commercial areas - OS, particularly in the south, there isn't enough in the area. Ability to acquire more open space - Light pollution to creeks, parks, and OS. Will affect migratory birds Chadwick Wyler
- Esp interested in 50 year plan for creeks. A lot of concrete line. - Can we restore creeks? - Flood management potential? - How much damage done to it? Allen Vinson
- Creek in the backyard
- The better the habitat, the more natural wildlife in the area Celia Chiang
Scoping Meeting Comments
Tuesday, July 26, 2022 6:45 PM
Pleasant Hill Page 1

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1743 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Celia Chiang
- Transportation Element timing?
Alex Khalfin
- Keeping an eye on transportation
Bike and Ped plan will go to council in September meeting. Viewing online of draft will be available before traffic safety commission meeting and council
Pleasant Hill Page 2

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1744 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix B
Special Status Species Tables

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1745 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat Requirements
Plants and Lichens
Amsinckia lunaris
bent-flowered fiddleneck
None/None
G3/S3
1B.2
Annual herb. Cismontane woodland, coastal bluff
scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Elevations:
10-1640ft. (3-500m.) Blooms Mar-Jun.

Arctostaphylos auriculata
Mt. Diablo manzanita
None/None
G2/S2
1B.3
Perennial evergreen shrub. Chaparral,
cismontane woodland. In canyons and on slopes.

On sandstone. Elevations: 445-2135ft. (135-
650m.) Blooms Jan-Mar.

Arctostaphylos manzanita
ssp. laevigata
Contra Costa manzanita
None/None
G5T2/S2
1B.2
Perennial evergreen shrub. Chaparral. Rocky
slopes. Elevations: 1410-3610ft. (430-1100m.)
Blooms Jan-Mar(Apr).

Arctostaphylos pallida
pallid manzanita
FT/SCE
G1/S1
1B.1
Perennial evergreen shrub. Broadleafed upland
forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, closedcone coniferous forest, coastal scrub. Grows on uplifted marine terraces on siliceous shale or thin
chert. May require fire. Elevations: 605-1525ft.
(185-465m.) Blooms Dec-Mar.

Astragalus tener var. tener
alkali milk-vetch
None/None
G2T1/S1
1B.2
Annual herb. Playas, valley and foothill grassland,
vernal pools. Alkaline. Elevations: 5-195ft. (1-
60m.) Blooms Mar-Jun.

Blepharizonia plumosa
big tarplant
None/None
G1G2/S1S2
1B.1
Annual herb. Valley and foothill grassland. Clay
(usually). Elevations: 100-1655ft. (30-505m.)
Blooms Jul-Oct.

Calochortus pulchellus
Mt. Diablo fairy-lantern
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Chaparral,
cismontane woodland, riparian woodland, valley
and foothill grassland. On wooded and brushy
slopes. Elevations: 100-2755ft. (30-840m.)
Blooms Apr-Jun.

Campanula exigua
chaparral harebell
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Chaparral. Rocky sites, usually on
serpentine in chaparral. Elevations: 900-4100ft.
(275-1250m.) Blooms May-Jun.

Centromadia parryi ssp.
congdonii
Congdon's tarplant
None/None
G3T1T2/S1S2
1B.1
Annual herb. Valley and foothill grassland.

Alkaline soils sometimes described as heavy
white clay. Elevations: 0-755ft. (0-230m.) Blooms
May-Oct(Nov).

Chloropyron maritimum ssp.
palustre
Point Reyes salty bird's-beak
None/None
G4?T2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb (hemiparasitic). Marshes and
swamps. Usually in coastal salt marsh with
Salicornia, Distichlis, Jaumea, Spartina, etc.

Elevations: 0-35ft. (0-10m.) Blooms Jun-Oct.

Chloropyron molle ssp. molle
soft salty bird's-beak
FE/SCR
G2T1/S1
1B.2
Annual herb (hemiparasitic). Marshes and
swamps. In coastal salt marsh with Distichlis,
Salicornia, Frankenia, etc. Elevations: 0-10ft. (0-
3m.) Blooms Jun-Nov.

Chorizanthe robusta var.
robusta
robust spineflower
FE/None
G2T1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Gravelly
(sometimes), sandy (sometimes). Elevations: 10-
985ft. (3-300m.) Blooms Apr-Sep.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1746 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Cicuta maculata var.
bolanderi
Bolander's water-hemlock
None/None
G5T4T5/S2?
2B.1
Perennial herb. Marshes and swamps. In fresh or
brackish water. Elevations: 0-655ft. (0-200m.)
Blooms Jul-Sep.

Cirsium andrewsii
Franciscan thistle
None/None
G3/S3
1B.2
Perennial herb. Broadleafed upland forest,
coastal bluff scrub, coastal prairie, coastal scrub.

Mesic, serpentinite (sometimes). Elevations: 0-
490ft. (0-150m.) Blooms Mar-Jul.

Clarkia franciscana
Presidio clarkia
FE/SCE
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland. Serpentine outcrops in grassland or
scrub. Elevations: 80-1100ft. (25-335m.) Blooms
May-Jul.

Cordylanthus nidularius
Mt. Diablo bird's-beak
None/SCR
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb (hemiparasitic). Chaparral. Grassy or
rocky areas within serpentine chaparral.

Elevations: 1970-2625ft. (600-800m.) Blooms
Jun-Aug.

Delphinium californicum ssp.
interius
Hospital Canyon larkspur
None/None
G3T3/S3
1B.2
Perennial herb. Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub. In wet, boggy
meadows, openings in chaparral and in canyons.

Elevations: 640-3595ft. (195-1095m.) Blooms
Apr-Jun.

Dirca occidentalis
western leatherwood
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial deciduous shrub. Broadleafed upland
forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, closedcone coniferous forest, north coast coniferous forest, riparian forest, riparian woodland. On
brushy slopes, mesic sites; mostly in mixed
evergreen and foothill woodland communities.

Elevations: 80-1395ft. (25-425m.) Blooms JanMar(Apr).

Eriastrum ertterae
Lime Ridge eriastrum
None/None
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Chaparral. Openings or edges;
alkaline or semi-alkaline, sandy. Elevations: 655-
950ft. (200-290m.) Blooms Jun-Jul.

Eriogonum luteolum var.
caninum
Tiburon buckwheat
None/None
G5T2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal prairie, valley and foothill grassland.

Serpentine soils; sandy to gravelly sites.

Elevations: 0-2295ft. (0-700m.) Blooms May-Sep.

Eriogonum truncatum
Mt. Diablo buckwheat
None/None
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and
foothill grassland. Dry, exposed clay or sandy
substrates. Elevations: 10-1150ft. (3-350m.)
Blooms Apr-Sep(Nov-Dec).

Eryngium jepsonii
Jepson's coyote-thistle
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial herb. Valley and foothill grassland,
vernal pools. Clay. Elevations: 10-985ft. (3-
300m.) Blooms Apr-Aug.

Erysimum capitatum var.
angustatum
Contra Costa wallflower
FE/SCE
G5T1/S1
1B.1
Perennial herb. Inland dunes. Stabilized dunes of
sand and clay near Antioch along the San Joaquin
River. Elevations: 10-65ft. (3-20m.) Blooms MarJul.

Extriplex joaquinana
San Joaquin spearscale
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Chenopod scrub, meadows and
seeps, playas, valley and foothill grassland. In
seasonal alkali wetlands or alkali sink scrub with
Distichlis spicata, Frankenia, etc. Elevations: 5-
2740ft. (1-835m.) Blooms Apr-Oct.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1747 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Fissidens pauperculus
minute pocket moss
None/None
G3?/S2
1B.2
Moss. North coast coniferous forest. Moss
growing on damp soil along the coast. In dry
streambeds and on-stream banks. Elevations: 35-
3360ft. (10-1024m.)
Fritillaria liliacea
fragrant fritillary
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Cismontane
woodland, coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley
and foothill grassland. Often on serpentine,
various soils reported though usually on clay, in
grassland. Elevations: 10-1345ft. (3-410m.)
Blooms Feb-Apr.

Gilia millefoliata
dark-eyed gilia
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Coastal dunes. Elevations: 5-100ft.
(2-30m.) Blooms Apr-Jul.

Grimmia torenii
Toren's grimmia
None/None
G2/S2
1B.3
Moss. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower
montane coniferous forest. Openings, rocky,
boulder and rock walls, serpentine, volcanic.

Elevations: 1065-3805ft. (325-1160m.)
Helianthella castanea
Diablo helianthella
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial herb. Broadleafed upland forest,
chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub,
riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland.

Azonal soils, Partial shade (often), rocky (usually).

Elevations: 195-4265ft. (60-1300m.) Blooms MarJun.

Hesperolinon breweri
Brewer's western flax
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill grassland. Often in rocky
serpentine soil in serpentine chaparral and
serpentine grassland. Elevations: 100-3100ft.
(30-945m.) Blooms May-Jul.

Hoita strobilina
Loma Prieta hoita
None/None
G2?/S2?
1B.1
Perennial herb. Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, riparian woodland. Serpentine; mesic
sites. Elevations: 100-2820ft. (30-860m.) Blooms
May-Jul(Aug-Oct).

Holocarpha macradenia
Santa Cruz tarplant
FT/SCE
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley
and foothill grassland. Light, sandy soil or sandy
clay; often with nonnatives. Elevations: 35-720ft.
(10-220m.) Blooms Jun-Oct.

Horkelia cuneata var. sericea
Kellogg's horkelia
None/None
G4T1?/S1?
1B.1
Perennial herb. Chaparral, closed-cone
coniferous forest, coastal dunes, coastal scrub.

Old dunes, coastal sandhills; openings. Sandy or
gravelly soils. Elevations: 35-655ft. (10-200m.)
Blooms Apr-Sep.

Isocoma arguta
Carquinez goldenbush
None/None
G1/S1
1B.1
Perennial shrub. Valley and foothill grassland.

Alkaline soils, flats, lower hills. On low benches
near drainages and on tops and sides of mounds
in swale habitat. Elevations: 5-65ft. (1-20m.)
Blooms Aug-Dec.

Lasthenia conjugens
Contra Costa goldfields
FE/None
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Cismontane woodland, playas,
valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Vernal
pools, swales, low depressions, in open grassy
areas. Elevations: 0-1540ft. (0-470m.) Blooms
Mar-Jun.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1748 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii
Delta tule pea
None/None
G5T2/S2
1B.2
Perennial herb. Marshes and swamps. In
freshwater and brackish marshes. Often found
with Typha, Aster lentus, Rosa californica, Juncus
spp., Scirpus, etc. Usually on marsh and slough
edges. Elevations: 0-15ft. (0-5m.) Blooms MayJul(Aug-Sep).

Lilaeopsis masonii
Mason's lilaeopsis
None/SCR
G2/S2
1B.1
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Marshes and
swamps, riparian scrub. Tidal zones, in muddy or
silty soil formed through river deposition or river
bank erosion. In brackish or freshwater.

Elevations: 0-35ft. (0-10m.) Blooms Apr-Nov.

Limosella australis
Delta mudwort
None/None
G4G5/S2
2B.1
Perennial stoloniferous herb. Marshes and
swamps, riparian scrub. Usually on mud banks of
the Delta in marshy or scrubby riparian
associations; often with Lilaeopsis masonii.

Elevations: 0-10ft. (0-3m.) Blooms May-Aug.

Madia radiata
showy golden madia
None/None
G3/S3
1B.1
Annual herb. Cismontane woodland, valley and
foothill grassland. Mostly on adobe clay in
grassland or among shrubs. Elevations: 80-
3985ft. (25-1215m.) Blooms Mar-May.

Malacothamnus hallii
Hall's bush-mallow
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial deciduous shrub. Chaparral, coastal
scrub. Some populations on serpentine.

Elevations: 35-2495ft. (10-760m.) Blooms
(Apr)May-Sep(Oct).

Meconella oregana
Oregon meconella
None/None
G2G3/S2
1B.1
Annual herb. Coastal prairie, coastal scrub. Open,
moist places. Elevations: 820-2035ft. (250-
620m.) Blooms Mar-Apr.

Monolopia gracilens
woodland woollythreads
None/None
G3/S3
1B.2
Annual herb. Broadleafed upland forest,
chaparral, cismontane woodland, north coast
coniferous forest, valley and foothill grassland.

Grassy sites, in openings; sandy to rocky soils.

Often seen on serpentine after burns but may
have only weak affinity to serpentine. Elevations:
330-3935ft. (100-1200m.) Blooms (Feb)Mar-Jul.

Navarretia gowenii
Lime Ridge navarretia
None/None
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Chaparral. On calcium carbonaterich soil with high clay content. Elevations: 590- 1000ft. (180-305m.) Blooms May-Jun.

Oenothera deltoides ssp.
howellii
Antioch Dunes eveningprimrose
FE/SCE
G5T1/S1
1B.1
Perennial herb. Inland dunes. Remnant river
bluffs and sand dunes east of Antioch.

Elevations: 0-100ft. (0-30m.) Blooms Mar-Sep.

Phacelia phacelioides
Mt. Diablo phacelia
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland.

Adjacent to trails, on rock outcrops and talus
slopes; sometimes on serpentine. Elevations:
1640-4495ft. (500-1370m.) Blooms Apr-May.

Plagiobothrys diffusus
San Francisco popcornflower
None/SCE
G1Q/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Coastal prairie, valley and foothill
grassland. Historically from grassy slopes with
marine influence. Elevations: 195-1180ft. (60-
360m.) Blooms Mar-Jun.

Sanicula maritima
adobe sanicle
None/SCR
G2/S2
1B.1
Perennial herb. Chaparral, coastal prairie,
meadows and seeps, valley and foothill
grassland. Moist clay or ultramafic soils.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1749 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Elevations: 100-785ft. (30-240m.) Blooms FebMay.

Sanicula saxatilis
rock sanicle
None/SCR
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial herb. Broadleafed upland forest,
chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Bedrock
outcrops and talus slopes in chaparral or oak
woodland habitat. Elevations: 2035-3855ft. (620-
1175m.) Blooms Apr-May.

Senecio aphanactis
chaparral ragwort
None/None
G3/S2
2B.2
Annual herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub. Drying alkaline flats. Elevations:
50-2625ft. (15-800m.) Blooms Jan-Apr(May).

Spergularia macrotheca var.
longistyla
long-styled sand-spurrey
None/None
G5T2/S2
1B.2
Perennial herb. Marshes and swamps, meadows
and seeps. Alkaline. Elevations: 0-835ft. (0-
255m.) Blooms Feb-May.

Streptanthus albidus ssp.
peramoenus
most beautiful jewelflower
None/None
G2T2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
valley and foothill grassland. Serpentine
outcrops, on ridges and slopes. Elevations: 310-
3280ft. (95-1000m.) Blooms (Mar)Apr-Sep(Oct).

Streptanthus hispidus
Mt. Diablo jewelflower
None/None
G2/S2
1B.3
Annual herb. Chaparral, valley and foothill
grassland. Talus or rocky outcrops. Elevations:
1200-3935ft. (365-1200m.) Blooms Mar-Jun.

Stuckenia filiformis ssp.
alpina
northern slender pondweed
None/None
G5T5/S2S3
2B.2
Perennial rhizomatous herb (aquatic). Marshes
and swamps. Shallow, clear water of lakes and
drainage channels. Elevations: 985-7055ft. (300-
2150m.) Blooms May-Jul.

Symphyotrichum lentum
Suisun Marsh aster
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Marshes and
swamps. Most often seen along sloughs with
Phragmites, Scirpus, blackberry, Typha, etc.

Elevations: 0-10ft. (0-3m.) Blooms (Apr)May-Nov.

Trifolium hydrophilum
saline clover
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Annual herb. Marshes and swamps, valley and
foothill grassland, vernal pools. Mesic, alkaline
sites. Elevations: 0-985ft. (0-300m.) Blooms AprJun.

Triquetrella californica
coastal triquetrella
None/None
G2/S2
1B.2
Moss. Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub. Grows
within 30m from the coast in coastal scrub,
grasslands and in open gravels on roadsides,
hillsides, rocky slopes, and fields. On gravel or
thin soil over outcrops. Elevations: 35-330ft. (10-
100m.)
Tropidocarpum capparideum
caper-fruited tropidocarpum
None/None
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Valley and foothill grassland.

Alkaline clay. Elevations: 5-1495ft. (1-455m.)
Blooms Mar-Apr.

Viburnum ellipticum
oval-leaved viburnum
None/None
G4G5/S3?
2B.3
Perennial deciduous shrub. Chaparral,
cismontane woodland, lower montane
coniferous forest. Elevations: 705-4595ft. (215-
1400m.) Blooms May-Jun.

Invertebrates
Branchinecta conservatio
Conservancy fairy shrimp
FE/None
G2/S2
Endemic to the grasslands of the northern twothirds of the Central Valley; found in large, turbid pools. Inhabit astatic pools located in swales
formed by old, braided alluvium; filled by
winter/spring rains, last until June.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1750 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
FT/None
G3/S3
Endemic to the grasslands of the Central Valley,
Central Coast mountains, and South Coast
mountains, in astatic rain-filled pools. Inhabit
small, clear-water sandstone-depression pools
and grassed swale, earth slump, or basalt-flow
depression pools.

Danaus plexippus pop. 1
monarch - California
overwintering population
FC/None
G4T2T3/S2S3
Winter roost sites extend along the coast from
northern Mendocino to Baja California, Mexico.

Roosts located in wind-protected tree groves
(eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress), with
nectar and water sources nearby.

Euphydryas editha bayensis
Bay checkerspot butterfly
FT/None
G5T1/S1
Restricted to native grasslands on outcrops of
serpentine soil in the vicinity of San Francisco
Bay. Plantago erecta is the primary host plant;
Orthocarpus densiflorus and O. purpurscens are
the secondary host plants.

Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
FE/None
G4/S3S4
Inhabits vernal pools and swales in the
Sacramento Valley containing clear to highly
turbid water. Pools commonly found in grassbottomed swales of unplowed grasslands. Some pools are mud-bottomed and highly turbid.

Speyeria callippe callippe
callippe silverspot butterfly
FE/None
G5T1/S1
Restricted to the northern coastal scrub of the
San Francisco peninsula. Hostplant is Viola
pedunculata. Most adults found on E-facing
slopes; males congregate on hilltops in search of
females.

Fish
Archoplites interruptus
Sacramento perch
None/None
G2G3/S1
SSC
Historically found in the sloughs, slow-moving
rivers, and lakes of the Central Valley. Prefers
warm water. Aquatic vegetation is essential for
young. Tolerates wide range of physio-chemical
water conditions.

Eucyclogobius newberryi
tidewater goby
FE/None
G3/S3
Brackish water habitats along the California coast
from Agua Hedionda Lagoon, San Diego County
to the mouth of the Smith River. Found in
shallow lagoons and lower stream reaches, they
need still but not stagnant water and high
oxygen levels.

Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus
pop. 11
steelhead - Central Valley DPS
FT/None
G5T2Q/S2
Populations in the Sacramento and San Joaquin
rivers and their tributaries.

Pogonichthys macrolepidotus
Sacramento splittail
None/None
GNR/S3
SSC
Endemic to the lakes and rivers of the Central
Valley, but now confined to the Delta, Suisun Bay
and associated marshes. Slow moving river
sections, dead end sloughs. Requires flooded
vegetation for spawning and foraging for young.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1751 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Spirinchus thaleichthys
longfin smelt
FC/ST
G5/S1
Euryhaline, nektonic and anadromous. Found in
open waters of estuaries, mostly in middle or
bottom of water column. Prefer salinities of 15-
30 ppt but can be found in completely
freshwater to almost pure seawater.

Amphibians
Ambystoma californiense
pop. 1
California tiger salamander -
central California DPS
FT/ST
G2G3/S3
WL
Lives in vacant or mammal-occupied burrows
throughout most of the year; in grassland,
savanna, or open woodland habitats. Need
underground refuges, especially ground squirrel
burrows, and vernal pools or other seasonal
water sources for breeding.

Rana boylii
foothill yellow-legged frog
None/SE
G3/S3
SSC
Partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a
rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Needs at
least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying.

Needs at least 15 weeks to attain
metamorphosis.

Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
FT/None
G2G3/S2S3
SSC
Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent
sources of deep water with dense, shrubby, or
emergent riparian vegetation. Requires 11-20
weeks of permanent water for larval
development. Must have access to estivation
habitat.

Reptiles
Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless
lizard
None/None
G3/S3
SSC
Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse
vegetation. Soil moisture is essential. They prefer
soils with a high moisture content.

Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
None/None
G3G4/S3
SSC
A thoroughly aquatic turtle of ponds, marshes,
rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches, usually
with aquatic vegetation, below 6000 ft elevation.

Needs basking sites and suitable (sandy banks or
grassy open fields) upland habitat up to 0.5 km
from water for egg-laying.

Masticophis lateralis
euryxanthus
Alameda whipsnake
FT/ST
G4T2/S2
Typically found in chaparral and scrub habitats
but will also use adjacent grassland, oak savanna,
and woodland habitats. Mostly south-facing
slopes and ravines, with rock outcrops, deep
crevices, or abundant rodent burrows, where
shrubs form a vegetative mosaic with oak trees
and grasses.

Phrynosoma blainvillii
coast horned lizard
None/None
G3G4/S3S4
SSC
Frequents a wide variety of habitats, most
common in lowlands along sandy washes with
scattered low bushes. Open areas for sunning,
bushes for cover, patches of loose soil for burial,
and abundant supply of ants and other insects.

Thamnophis gigas
giant gartersnake
FT/ST
G2/S2
Prefers freshwater marsh and low gradient
streams. Has adapted to drainage canals and
irrigation ditches. This is the most aquatic of the
gartersnakes in California.

Birds

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1752 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
None/None
G5/S4
WL
Woodland, chiefly of open, interrupted, or
marginal type. Nest sites mainly in riparian
growths of deciduous trees, as in canyon
bottoms on river floodplains; also, live oaks.

Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
None/ST
G1G2/S1S2
SSC
Highly colonial species, most numerous in
Central Valley and vicinity. Largely endemic to
California. Requires open water, protected
nesting substrate, and foraging area with insect
prey within a few km of the colony.

Aquila chrysaetos
golden eagle
None/None
G5/S3
FP
WL
Rolling foothills, mountain areas, sage-juniper
flats, and desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide
nesting habitat in most parts of range; also, large
trees in open areas.

Asio flammeus
short-eared owl
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Found in swamp lands, both fresh and salt;
lowland meadows; irrigated alfalfa fields. Tule
patches/tall grass needed for nesting/daytime
seclusion. Nests on dry ground in depression
concealed in vegetation.

Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
None/None
G4/S3
SSC
Open, dry annual or perennial grasslands,
deserts, and scrublands characterized by lowgrowing vegetation. Subterranean nester, dependent upon burrowing mammals, most
notably, the California ground squirrel.

Branta hutchinsii leucopareia
cackling (=Aleutian Canada)
goose
FD/None
G5T3/S3
WL
Winters on lakes and inland prairies. Forages on
natural pasture or that cultivated to grain; loafs
on lakes, reservoirs, ponds.

Buteo regalis
ferruginous hawk
None/None
G4/S3S4
WL
Open grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub,
low foothills and fringes of pinyon and juniper
habitats. Eats mostly lagomorphs, ground
squirrels, and mice. Population trends may
follow lagomorph population cycles.

Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
None/ST
G5/S3
Breeds in grasslands with scattered trees,
juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, savannahs, and
agricultural or ranch lands with groves or lines of
trees. Requires adjacent suitable foraging areas
such as grasslands, or alfalfa or grain fields
supporting rodent populations.

Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Coastal salt and freshwater marsh. Nest and
forage in grasslands, from salt grass in desert
sink to mountain cienagas. Nests on ground in
shrubby vegetation, usually at marsh edge; nest
built of a large mound of sticks in wet areas.

Coturnicops noveboracensis
yellow rail
None/None
G4/S1S2
SSC
Summer resident in eastern Sierra Nevada in
Mono County. Freshwater marshlands.

Eremophila alpestris actia
California horned lark
None/None
G5T4Q/S4
WL
Coastal regions, chiefly from Sonoma County to
San Diego County. Also, main part of San Joaquin
Valley and east to foothills. Short-grass prairie,
"bald" hills, mountain meadows, open coastal
plains, fallow grain fields, alkali flats.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1753 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
None/None
G5/S4
WL
Inhabits dry, open terrain, either level or hilly.

Breeding sites located on cliffs. Forages far afield,
even to marshlands and ocean shores.

Falco peregrinus anatum
American peregrine falcon
FD/SD
G4T4/S3S4
FP
Near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water; on
cliffs, banks, dunes, mounds; also, human-made
structures. Nest consists of a scrape or a
depression or ledge in an open site.

Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
saltmarsh common
yellowthroat
None/None
G5T3/S3
SSC
Resident of the San Francisco Bay region, in fresh
and saltwater marshes. Requires thick,
continuous cover down to water surface for
foraging; tall grasses, tule patches, willows for
nesting.

Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
FD/SE
G5/S3
FP
Ocean shore, lake margins, and rivers for both
nesting and wintering. Most nests within 1 mile
of water. Nests in large, old-growth, or dominant
live tree with open branches, especially
ponderosa pine. Roosts communally in winter.

Laterallus jamaicensis
coturniculus
California black rail
None/ST
G3G4T1/S1
FP
Inhabits freshwater marshes, wet meadows and
shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering
larger bays. Needs water depths of about 1 inch
that do not fluctuate during the year and dense
vegetation for nesting habitat.

Melospiza melodia maxillaris
Suisun song sparrow
None/None
G5T3/S3
SSC
Resident of brackish-water marshes surrounding
Suisun Bay. Inhabits cattails, tules and other
sedges, and Salicornia; also known to frequent
tangles bordering sloughs.

Melospiza melodia pusillula
Alameda song sparrow
None/None
G5T2?/S2S3
SSC
Resident of salt marshes bordering south arm of
San Francisco Bay. Inhabits Salicornia marshes;
nests low in Grindelia bushes (high enough to
escape high tides) and in Salicornia.

Melospiza melodia samuelis
San Pablo song sparrow
None/None
G5T2/S2
SSC
Resident of salt marshes along the north side of
San Francisco and San Pablo bays. Inhabits tidal
sloughs in the Salicornia marshes; nests in
Grindelia bordering slough channels.

Pandion haliaetus
osprey
None/None
G5/S4
WL
Ocean shore, bays, freshwater lakes, and larger
streams. Large nests built in tree-tops within 15
miles of a good fish-producing body of water.

Rallus obsoletus obsoletus
California Ridgway's rail
FE/SE
G3T1/S1
FP
Salt water and brackish marshes traversed by
tidal sloughs in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay.

Associated with abundant growths of pickleweed
but feeds away from cover on invertebrates from
mud-bottomed sloughs.

Sternula antillarum browni
California least tern
FE/SE
G4T2T3Q/S2
FP
Nests along the coast from San Francisco Bay
south to northern Baja California. Colonial
breeder on bare or sparsely vegetated, flat
substrates: sand beaches, alkali flats, landfills, or
paved areas.

Mammals
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
None/None
G4/S3
SSC
Found in a variety of habitats including deserts,
grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forests.

Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky
areas for roosting. Roosts in crevices of rock

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1754 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) outcrops, caves, mine tunnels, buildings, bridges,
and hollows of live and dead trees which must
protect bats from high temperatures. Very
sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites.

Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend's big-eared bat
None/None
G4/S2
SSC
Occurs throughout California in a wide variety of
habitats. Most common in mesic sites, typically
coniferous or deciduous forests. Roosts in the
open, hanging from walls, ceilings in caves, lava
tubes, bridges, and buildings. This species is
extremely sensitive to human disturbance.

Neotoma fuscipes annectens
San Francisco dusky-footed
woodrat
None/None
G5T2T3/S2S3
SSC
Typically found in forest habitats with moderate
to dense understory. Can occur in chaparral,
riparian woodlands, and coniferous forests,
particularly redwood. Builds middens out of
grasses, leaves, and woody debris. This
subspecies is found only in the San Francisco Bay
region.

Nyctinomops macrotis
big free-tailed bat
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Low-lying arid areas in Southern California. Need
high cliffs or rocky outcrops for roosting sites.

Feeds principally on large moths.

Reithrodontomys raviventris
salt-marsh harvest mouse
FE/SE
G1G2/S1S2
FP
Only in the saline emergent wetlands of San
Francisco Bay and its tributaries. Pickleweed is
primary habitat but may occur in other marsh
vegetation types and in adjacent upland areas.

Does not burrow; builds loosely organized nests.

Requires higher areas for flood escape.

Scapanus latimanus parvus
Alameda Island mole
None/None
G5T1Q/SH
SSC
Only known from Alameda Island. Found in a
variety of habitats, especially annual and
perennial grasslands. Prefers moist, friable soils.

Avoids flooded soils.

Sorex ornatus sinuosus
Suisun shrew
None/None
G5T1T2Q/S1S2
SSC
Tidal marshes of the northern shores of San
Pablo and Suisun bays. Require dense low-lying
cover and driftweed and other litter above the
mean hightide line for nesting and foraging.

Taxidea taxus
American badger
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Most abundant in drier open stages of most
shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats, with
friable soils. Needs sufficient food, friable soils
and open, uncultivated ground. Preys on
burrowing rodents. Digs burrows.

Vulpes macrotis mutica
San Joaquin kit fox
FE/ST
G4T2/S2
Annual grasslands or grassy open stages with
scattered shrubby vegetation. Need loosetextured sandy soils for burrowing, and suitable prey base.

FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered
FC = Federal Candidate Species ST = State Threatened
FE = Federally Endangered SR = State Rare
FS = Federally Sensitive SS = State Sensitive
DL = Delisted SC = State Candidate
SSC = CDFW Species of Special Concern FP = Fully Protected G-Rank/S-Rank = Global Rank and State Rank as per NatureServe and CDFW’s CNDDB RareFind5 CRPR (California Rare Plant Rank):
1A=Presumed Extinct in California

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1755 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 1B=Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere 2=Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 3=Need more information (a Review List)
4=Plants of Limited Distribution (a Watch List)
CRPR Threat Code Extension:
.1=Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat) .2=Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened) .3=Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened) Sources: CNDDB (CDFW, 2022a); USFWS (2022a), CDFW Special Animals List (2021). CDFW Special Plants List (2021) and CNPS Rare Plant Inventory (2022)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1756 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix C
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling and Energy Calculations

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1757 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1758 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline
Contra Costa County, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Civic center used as proxy for semi public & institutional; elementary school used as proxy for school; strip mall used as proxy for commercial. Lot acreage reduced to reflect total acreage of Pleasant Hill.

Construction Phase - No construction; operational only run Off-road Equipment -
Water Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population General Office Building 1,421.15 1000sqft 818.00 1,421,150.00 0 Government (Civic Center) 396.14 1000sqft 9.09 396,140.00 0 Elementary School 1,084.83 1000sqft 24.90 1,084,830.00 0 General Heavy Industry 1,647.37 1000sqft 37.82 1,647,370.00 0 Apartments Mid Rise 4,573.00 Dwelling Unit 120.34 4,573,000.00 13079 Single Family Housing 9,763.00 Dwelling Unit 3,169.81 17,573,400.00 27922 Strip Mall 3,454.83 1000sqft 318.00 3,454,830.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
5 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 58

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Operational Year 2022
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1759 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10,000.00 0.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 32.63 818.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 79.31 318.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1760 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1761 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Highest

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 208.8368 2.7336 204.8377 0.2070 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 1,449.466 2 564.3565 2,013.822
8 2.8479 0.0846 2,110.234
9 Energy 2.8261 24.4700 12.6220 0.1542 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 0.0000 43,537.03 01 43,537.03
01 3.0547 0.8181 43,857.17
79 Mobile 131.6928 148.4513 1,131.114
1 2.1464 214.1922 1.8872 216.0794 57.2071 1.7642 58.9713 0.0000 198,909.3 093
198,909.3
093

14.7587 10.3223 202,354.3
350
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4,971.467
9 0.0000 4,971.467
9 293.8053 0.0000 12,316.60
13 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 613.4581 1,301.505 1 1,914.963
2 63.2186 1.5133 3,946.384
8 Total 343.3557 175.6549 1,348.573
7 2.5075 214.1922 18.5724 232.7645 57.2071 18.4494 75.6564 7,034.392 2 244,312.2
010
251,346.5
932
377.6853 12.7383 264,584.7
339
Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1762 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

14.7587 10.3223 202,354.3
350
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4,971.467
9 0.0000 4,971.467
9 293.8053 0.0000 12,316.60
13 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 490.7665 1,107.890 2 1,598.656
7 50.5857 1.2119 3,224.453
4 Total 343.3557 175.6549 1,348.573
7 2.5075 214.1922 18.5724 232.7645 57.2071 18.4494 75.6564 6,911.700 6 244,118.5
861
251,030.2
867
365.0524 12.4369 263,862.8
024
Mitigated Operational

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 10/25/2022 10/11/2022 5 0
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.74 0.08 0.13 3.34 2.37 0.27 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1763 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

3.2 Demolition - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1764 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1765 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 131.6928 148.4513 1,131.114
1 2.1464 214.1922 1.8872 216.0794 57.2071 1.7642 58.9713 0.0000 198,909.3 093
198,909.3
093

14.7587 10.3223 202,354.3
350
Unmitigated 131.6928 148.4513 1,131.114
1 2.1464 214.1922 1.8872 216.0794 57.2071 1.7642 58.9713 0.0000 198,909.3 093
198,909.3
093

14.7587 10.3223 202,354.3
350

4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Mid Rise 24,877.12 22,453.43 18703.57 54,619,771 54,619,771 Elementary School 21,175.88 0.00 0.00 33,351,092 33,351,092 General Heavy Industry 6,474.16 10,576.12 8385.11 21,409,213 21,409,213 General Office Building 13,842.00 3,140.74 994.81 25,039,677 25,039,677 Government (Civic Center) 13,460.84 0.00 0.00 18,380,167 18,380,167 Single Family Housing 92,162.72 93,139.02 83473.65 210,314,909 210,314,909 Strip Mall 153,118.07 145,241.05 70582.18 215,915,615 215,915,615 Total 325,110.79 274,550.36 182,139.32 579,030,445 579,030,445 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 Elementary School 9.50 7.30 7.30 65.00 30.00 5.00 63 25 12 General Heavy Industry 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Government (Civic Center) 9.50 7.30 7.30 75.00 20.00 5.00 50 34 16 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1766 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 Strip Mall 9.50 7.30 7.30 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Mid Rise 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595 Elementary School 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595 General Heavy Industry 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595 General Office Building 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595 Government (Civic Center) 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595 Single Family Housing 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595 Strip Mall 0.553951 0.056244 0.181537 0.131938 0.024760 0.005449 0.007285 0.007018 0.000560 0.000348 0.026165 0.001150 0.003595

5.0 Energy Detail

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1767 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15,568.49
15 15,568.49
15 2.5187 0.3053 15,722.43
62 Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15,568.49
15 15,568.49
15 2.5187 0.3053 15,722.43
62 NaturalGas
Mitigated

2.8261 24.4700 12.6220 0.1542 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 0.0000 27,968.53 86 27,968.53
86 0.5361 0.5128 28,134.74
16 NaturalGas
Unmitigated

2.8261 24.4700 12.6220 0.1542 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 0.0000 27,968.53 86 27,968.53
86 0.5361 0.5128 28,134.74
16 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1768 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

3.86099e
+007

0.2082 1.7791 0.7571 0.0114 0.1438 0.1438 0.1438 0.1438 0.0000 2,060.370 5 2,060.370
5 0.0395 0.0378 2,072.614
2 Elementary
School

1.77044e
+007

0.0955 0.8679 0.7290 5.2100e0030.0660 0.0660 0.0660 0.0660 0.0000 944.7756 944.7756 0.0181 0.0173 950.3899 General Heavy
Industry

4.04759e
+007

0.2183 1.9841 1.6667 0.0119 0.1508 0.1508 0.1508 0.1508 0.0000 2,159.947 2 2,159.947
2 0.0414 0.0396 2,172.782
6 General Office
Building

2.7215e
+007

0.1468 1.3341 1.1206 8.0000e0030.1014 0.1014 0.1014 0.1014 0.0000 1,452.297 2 1,452.297
2 0.0278 0.0266 1,460.927
5 Government
(Civic Center)

7.58608e
+006

0.0409 0.3719 0.3124 2.2300e0030.0283 0.0283 0.0283 0.0283 0.0000 404.8222 404.8222 7.7600e0037.4200e003407.2278 Single Family
Housing

3.76765e
+008

2.0316 17.3608 7.3876 0.1108 1.4036 1.4036 1.4036 1.4036 0.0000 20,105.63 12 20,105.63
12 0.3854 0.3686 20,225.10
89 Strip Mall 1.5754e
+007

0.0850 0.7723 0.6487 4.6300e0030.0587 0.0587 0.0587 0.0587 0.0000 840.6948 840.6948 0.0161 0.0154 845.6906 Total 2.8261 24.4700 12.6220 0.1541 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 0.0000 27,968.53 86 27,968.53
86 0.5361 0.5128 28,134.74
16 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1769 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

3.86099e
+007

0.2082 1.7791 0.7571 0.0114 0.1438 0.1438 0.1438 0.1438 0.0000 2,060.370 5 2,060.370
5 0.0395 0.0378 2,072.614
2 Elementary
School

1.77044e
+007

0.0955 0.8679 0.7290 5.2100e0030.0660 0.0660 0.0660 0.0660 0.0000 944.7756 944.7756 0.0181 0.0173 950.3899 General Heavy
Industry

4.04759e
+007

0.2183 1.9841 1.6667 0.0119 0.1508 0.1508 0.1508 0.1508 0.0000 2,159.947 2 2,159.947
2 0.0414 0.0396 2,172.782
6 General Office
Building

2.7215e
+007

0.1468 1.3341 1.1206 8.0000e0030.1014 0.1014 0.1014 0.1014 0.0000 1,452.297 2 1,452.297
2 0.0278 0.0266 1,460.927
5 Government
(Civic Center)

7.58608e
+006

0.0409 0.3719 0.3124 2.2300e0030.0283 0.0283 0.0283 0.0283 0.0000 404.8222 404.8222 7.7600e0037.4200e003407.2278 Single Family
Housing

3.76765e
+008

2.0316 17.3608 7.3876 0.1108 1.4036 1.4036 1.4036 1.4036 0.0000 20,105.63 12 20,105.63
12 0.3854 0.3686 20,225.10
89 Strip Mall 1.5754e
+007

0.0850 0.7723 0.6487 4.6300e0030.0587 0.0587 0.0587 0.0587 0.0000 840.6948 840.6948 0.0161 0.0154 845.6906 Total 2.8261 24.4700 12.6220 0.1541 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 1.9526 0.0000 27,968.53 86 27,968.53
86 0.5361 0.5128 28,134.74
16 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1770 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

1.77724e
+007
1,644.366
7 0.2660 0.0323 1,660.626
6 Elementary
School

4.74071e
+006
438.6281 0.0710 8.6000e003442.9654
General Heavy
Industry

1.224e
+007
1,132.487
2 0.1832 0.0222 1,143.685
5 General Office
Building

1.71106e
+007
1,583.141
5 0.2561 0.0311 1,598.796
0 Government
(Civic Center)

4.76953e
+006
441.2945 0.0714 8.6500e003445.6581
Single Family
Housing

7.62541e
+007
7,055.317
6 1.1414 0.1384 7,125.082
1 Strip Mall 3.53775e
+007
3,273.256
0 0.5296 0.0642 3,305.622
7 Total 15,568.49
15 2.5187 0.3053 15,722.43
62 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1771 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise

1.77724e
+007
1,644.366
7 0.2660 0.0323 1,660.626
6 Elementary
School

4.74071e
+006
438.6281 0.0710 8.6000e003442.9654
General Heavy
Industry

1.224e
+007
1,132.487
2 0.1832 0.0222 1,143.685
5 General Office
Building

1.71106e
+007
1,583.141
5 0.2561 0.0311 1,598.796
0 Government
(Civic Center)

4.76953e
+006
441.2945 0.0714 8.6500e003445.6581
Single Family
Housing

7.62541e
+007
7,055.317
6 1.1414 0.1384 7,125.082
1 Strip Mall 3.53775e
+007
3,273.256
0 0.5296 0.0642 3,305.622
7 Total 15,568.49
15 2.5187 0.3053 15,722.43
62 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1772 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 208.8368 2.7336 204.8377 0.2070 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 1,449.466 2 564.3565 2,013.822
8 2.8479 0.0846 2,110.234
9 Unmitigated 208.8368 2.7336 204.8377 0.2070 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 1,449.466 2 564.3565 2,013.822
8 2.8479 0.0846 2,110.234
9 6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

19.7635 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products
117.7536 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 68.0942 1.5039 98.2030 0.2014 14.1435 14.1435 14.1435 14.1435 1,449.466 2 390.3350 1,839.801
3 2.6798 0.0846 1,932.010
2 Landscaping 3.2254 1.2296 106.6347 5.6300e0030.5890 0.5890 0.5890 0.5890 0.0000 174.0215 174.0215 0.1681 0.0000 178.2247 Total 208.8368 2.7336 204.8377 0.2070 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 1,449.466 2 564.3565 2,013.822
8 2.8479 0.0846 2,110.234
9 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1773 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

19.7635 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products
117.7536 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 68.0942 1.5039 98.2030 0.2014 14.1435 14.1435 14.1435 14.1435 1,449.466 2 390.3350 1,839.801
3 2.6798 0.0846 1,932.010
2 Landscaping 3.2254 1.2296 106.6347 5.6300e0030.5890 0.5890 0.5890 0.5890 0.0000 174.0215 174.0215 0.1681 0.0000 178.2247 Total 208.8368 2.7336 204.8377 0.2070 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 14.7326 1,449.466 2 564.3565 2,013.822
8 2.8479 0.0846 2,110.234
9 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1774 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 1,598.656
7 50.5857 1.2119 3,224.453
4 Unmitigated 1,914.963
2 63.2186 1.5133 3,946.384
8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1775 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
297.949 /
187.838
304.5208 9.7427 0.2334 617.6289
Elementary
School

31.4567 /

80.8887

51.9229 1.0318 0.0250 85.1756
General Heavy
Industry
380.954 /
0 311.5825 12.4443 0.2969 711.1495
General Office
Building
252.586 /
154.811
256.7233 8.2591 0.1978 522.1462
Government
(Civic Center)

78.697 /

48.2337

79.9860 2.5733 0.0616 162.6825
Single Family
Housing
636.099 /
401.019
650.1284 20.7998 0.4982 1,318.589
7 Strip Mall 255.908 /
156.847
260.0993 8.3677 0.2004 529.0127
Total 1,914.963
2 63.2186 1.5133 3,946.384
8 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1776 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
238.359 /
187.838
255.7823 7.7961 0.1869 506.3890
Elementary
School

25.1654 /

80.8887

46.7772 0.8263 0.0201 73.4311
General Heavy
Industry
304.763 /
0 249.2660 9.9554 0.2375 568.9196
General Office
Building
202.069 /
154.811
215.4052 6.6089 0.1584 427.8427
Government
(Civic Center)

62.9576 /

48.2337

67.1127 2.0591 0.0494 133.3008
Single Family
Housing
508.879 /
401.019
546.0753 16.6441 0.3991 1,081.101
2 Strip Mall 204.726 /
156.847
218.2379 6.6958 0.1605 433.4690
Total 1,598.656
7 50.5857 1.2119 3,224.453
4 Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1777 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 4,971.467
9 293.8053 0.0000 12,316.60
13 Unmitigated 4,971.467
9 293.8053 0.0000 12,316.60
13 Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1778 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Mid
Rise
2103.58 427.0077 25.2354 0.0000 1,057.893
6 Elementary
School
1410.28 286.2741 16.9183 0.0000 709.2320
General Heavy
Industry
2042.74 414.6578 24.5056 0.0000 1,027.297
1 General Office
Building
1321.67 268.2871 15.8553 0.0000 664.6699
Government
(Civic Center)
2258 458.3536 27.0879 0.0000 1,135.551
6 Single Family
Housing
11727.2 2,380.523
7 140.6849 0.0000 5,897.646
8 Strip Mall 3627.57 736.3639 43.5179 0.0000 1,824.310
5 Total 4,971.467
9 293.8053 0.0000 12,316.60
13 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1779 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1780 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

11.0 Vegetation
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 23 Date: 12/2/2022 5:01 PM Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan Baseline - Contra Costa County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1781 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Calendar
Year
Season Sub Area Vehicle Class Fuel Process Pollutant Emission 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.35E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.005266 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.62E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.499235 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses NG IDLEX CH4 6.08E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses NG IDLEX CO2 0.000153 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses NG RUNEX CH4 4.97E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) All Other Buses NG RUNEX CO2 0.006783 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Dsl RUNEX CH4 4.70E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.847596 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Gas RUNEX CH4 0.003403 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Gas RUNEX CO2 274.9945 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Gas STREX CH4 0.008108 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Gas STREX CO2 7.94609 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Phe RUNEX CH4 1.55E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Phe RUNEX CO2 3.557321 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Phe STREX CH4 7.62E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDA Phe STREX CO2 0.144918 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.88E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.00841 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Gas RUNEX CH4 0.000808 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Gas RUNEX CO2 30.74305 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Gas STREX CH4 0.001236 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Gas STREX CO2 0.918329 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Phe RUNEX CH4 2.83E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Phe RUNEX CO2 0.006496 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Phe STREX CH4 1.31E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT1 Phe STREX CO2 0.000274 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.28E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.643926 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Gas RUNEX CH4 0.001857 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Gas RUNEX CO2 164.5389

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1782 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Gas STREX CH4 0.004058 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Gas STREX CO2 4.53831 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Phe RUNEX CH4 1.47E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Phe RUNEX CO2 0.337842 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Phe STREX CH4 6.81E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LDT2 Phe STREX CO2 0.015493 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.31E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.087764 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Dsl RUNEX CH4 0.00025 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Dsl RUNEX CO2 15.59969 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Gas IDLEX CH4 5.68E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Gas IDLEX CO2 0.109614 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Gas RUNEX CH4 0.000391 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Gas RUNEX CO2 32.42547 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Gas STREX CH4 0.000504 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD1 Gas STREX CO2 0.29435 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.24E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.052151 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Dsl RUNEX CH4 8.43E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Dsl RUNEX CO2 7.400849 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Gas IDLEX CH4 6.49E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Gas IDLEX CO2 0.014703 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Gas RUNEX CH4 3.80E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Gas RUNEX CO2 4.125914 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Gas STREX CH4 5.69E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) LHD2 Gas STREX CO2 0.033932 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MCY Gas RUNEX CH4 0.001562 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MCY Gas RUNEX CO2 1.269711 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MCY Gas STREX CH4 0.000621 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MCY Gas STREX CO2 0.09809 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.97E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Dsl RUNEX CO2 2.126978 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Gas RUNEX CH4 0.001816 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Gas RUNEX CO2 124.5451

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1783 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Gas STREX CH4 0.003605 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Gas STREX CO2 3.662246 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Phe RUNEX CH4 1.03E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Phe RUNEX CO2 0.236389 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Phe STREX CH4 4.95E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MDV Phe STREX CO2 0.014224 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MH Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.42E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MH Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.609759 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MH Gas RUNEX CH4 2.19E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MH Gas RUNEX CO2 2.564304 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MH Gas STREX CH4 4.64E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) MH Gas STREX CO2 0.000375 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) Motor Coach Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.51E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) Motor Coach Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.020201 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) Motor Coach Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.03E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) Motor Coach Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.476301 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) OBUS Gas IDLEX CH4 1.99E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) OBUS Gas IDLEX CO2 0.00761 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) OBUS Gas RUNEX CH4 2.10E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) OBUS Gas RUNEX CO2 1.725941 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) OBUS Gas STREX CH4 1.61E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) OBUS Gas STREX CO2 0.010215 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) PTO Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.93E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) PTO Dsl RUNEX CO2 2.234608 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Dsl IDLEX CH4 2.55E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.071921 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.79E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.866762 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Gas IDLEX CH4 7.28E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Gas IDLEX CO2 0.012453 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Gas RUNEX CH4 2.02E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Gas RUNEX CO2 0.22358 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Gas STREX CH4 1.25E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS Gas STREX CO2 0.000831

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1784 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS NG IDLEX CH4 2.25E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS NG IDLEX CO2 0.005454 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS NG RUNEX CH4 0.000131 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) SBUS NG RUNEX CO2 0.044179 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.30E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CO2 7.37E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CH4 5.64E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.009083 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.90E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CO2 9.96E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CH4 5.02E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.012427 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.26E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.000292 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.64E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.032129 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 2.04E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.000527 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 7.47E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.189791 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 NG IDLEX CH4 0 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 NG IDLEX CO2 0 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 NG RUNEX CH4 0 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 CAIRP Class 7 NG RUNEX CO2 0 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.01E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.043541 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.80E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.815366 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 NG IDLEX CH4 1.34E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000368 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 NG RUNEX CH4 2.47E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 NG RUNEX CO2 0.003235 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.59E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.034519

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1785 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.29E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.665092 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 NG IDLEX CH4 1.16E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000306 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 NG RUNEX CH4 1.99E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 NG RUNEX CO2 0.002644 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 4.34E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.075314 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 4.08E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 1.442 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 NG IDLEX CH4 2.62E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000693 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 NG RUNEX CH4 4.55E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 NG RUNEX CO2 0.006059 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.96E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.0082 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 5.24E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.230412 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 NG IDLEX CH4 6.99E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000165 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 NG RUNEX CH4 1.83E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 NG RUNEX CO2 0.002487 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.22E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.116793 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.15E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CO2 2.213127 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 NG IDLEX CH4 2.44E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000717 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 NG RUNEX CH4 4.47E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 4 NG RUNEX CO2 0.00643 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.06E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.235492 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CH4 5.41E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CO2 5.205814

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1786 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 NG IDLEX CH4 6.71E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 NG IDLEX CO2 0.001684 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 NG RUNEX CH4 9.42E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 5 NG RUNEX CO2 0.014714 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.34E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.187913 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 9.92E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 3.911911 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 NG IDLEX CH4 5.76E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 NG IDLEX CO2 0.001437 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 NG RUNEX CH4 7.86E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 6 NG RUNEX CO2 0.012373 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 5.53E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.104447 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.28E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 2.383374 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 NG IDLEX CH4 1.40E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 NG IDLEX CO2 0.003464 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 NG RUNEX CH4 2.80E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Other Class 7 NG RUNEX CO2 0.040741 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 4.10E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.001722 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.18E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.044007 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 NG IDLEX CH4 2.19E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 NG IDLEX CO2 7.43E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 NG RUNEX CH4 6.25E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 NG RUNEX CO2 8.39E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 5.39E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.012631 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 6.23E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.342525 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 NG IDLEX CH4 8.41E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000213

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1787 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 NG RUNEX CH4 2.15E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 NG RUNEX CO2 0.003138 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.98E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CO2 4.19E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.76E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.005104 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CH4 2.22E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CO2 5.63E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.01E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.006986 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 7.40E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.000166 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.09E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.018062 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.10E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.000285 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 5.01E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.123553 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CH4 8.21E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.022523 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CH4 9.13E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.260932 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 NG IDLEX CH4 1.49E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000535 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 NG RUNEX CH4 3.16E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 4 NG RUNEX CO2 0.00341 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.32E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.03448 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CH4 9.62E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.455484 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 NG IDLEX CH4 1.16E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 NG IDLEX CO2 0.00353 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 NG RUNEX CH4 2.03E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 5 NG RUNEX CO2 0.023452

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1788 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.78E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.033388 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.39E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.428658 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 NG IDLEX CH4 5.20E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 NG IDLEX CO2 0.001548 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 NG RUNEX CH4 9.10E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 6 NG RUNEX CO2 0.010268 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.14E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.050026 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.85E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.806052 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 NG IDLEX CH4 8.38E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 NG IDLEX CO2 0.00249 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 NG RUNEX CH4 2.01E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Public Class 7 NG RUNEX CO2 0.022505 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.05E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.007864 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.39E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.211746 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 NG IDLEX CH4 7.33E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000188 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 NG RUNEX CH4 1.61E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 5 NG RUNEX CO2 0.002224 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CH4 5.92E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.001516 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.15E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.040152 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 NG IDLEX CH4 1.30E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 NG IDLEX CO2 3.35E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 NG RUNEX CH4 2.93E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 6 NG RUNEX CO2 0.000397 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CH4 6.53E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.001696

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1789 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.78E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.055254 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 NG IDLEX CH4 2.69E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 NG IDLEX CO2 6.64E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 NG RUNEX CH4 6.42E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6 Utility Class 7 NG RUNEX CO2 0.000888 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6TS Gas IDLEX CH4 7.21E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6TS Gas IDLEX CO2 0.029709 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6TS Gas RUNEX CH4 7.95E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6TS Gas RUNEX CO2 5.081874 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6TS Gas STREX CH4 6.49E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T6TS Gas STREX CO2 0.042644 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 2.19E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 1.14428 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 9.36E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 14.50568 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 1.44E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.00426 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 1.74E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 CAIRP Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.020456 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 2.46E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 1.253622 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 8.68E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 17.36822 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.02E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.533438 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 4.25E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 6.274857 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 7.70E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.044674 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.50E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 1.395064 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 4.84E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.27578

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1790 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.06E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 4.962207 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 3.70E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000923 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 6.64E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POAK Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.007659 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.12E-14 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 6.61E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 4.53E-14 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 1.54E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 4.10E-13 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 9.93E-11 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 9.47E-13 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 POLA Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 1.11E-09 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.86E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.11458 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 9.00E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 2.825499 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 2.75E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.000737 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 1.20E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Public Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.010259 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 5.13E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.026586 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.75E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.692172 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 1.03E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.002768 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 2.49E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF)T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.027925 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.40E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.184013 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 3.00E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 3.855228

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1791 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 7.30E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.018875 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 0.000149 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Dump Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.175076 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 3.69E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.191049 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.30E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 3.818159 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 7.13E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.019411 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 0.000139 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Single Other Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.15756 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 7.47E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.057105 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.41E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 3.809861 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 0.000244 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.093094 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 0.004394 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 SWCV Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 1.466704 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 1.52E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.840992 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 1.30E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 12.10711 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 NG IDLEX CH4 0.000639 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 NG IDLEX CO2 0.144319 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 NG RUNEX CH4 0.000843 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Tractor Class 8 NG RUNEX CO2 0.957735 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CH4 9.48E-08 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl IDLEX CO2 0.005261 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CH4 2.24E-07 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl RUNEX CO2 0.26245 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7IS Gas RUNEX CH4 1.03E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7IS Gas RUNEX CO2 0.006981

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1792 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7IS Gas STREX CH4 6.09E-10 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) T7IS Gas STREX CO2 6.87E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS Dsl RUNEX CH4 9.08E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS Dsl RUNEX CO2 2.45697 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS Gas RUNEX CH4 1.47E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS Gas RUNEX CO2 0.582278 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS Gas STREX CH4 1.87E-06 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS Gas STREX CO2 0.00179 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS NG RUNEX CH4 9.31E-05 2022 Annual Contra Costa (SF) UBUS NG RUNEX CO2 0.027452 TOTAL 799.7013 tons/day
291891 tons/year
264,799 MT/year

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1793 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Energy Calculations

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1794 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) OR
Annual VMT: 1,886,700
Daily Vehicle
Trips:

Average Trip
Distance:

Passenger Vehicles 25.3
Light-Med Duty Trucks 18.6
Heavy Trucks/Other 7.6
Motorcycles 44
Vehicle Type Percent Fuel Type
Annual VMT:

VMT Vehicle Trips: VMT
Fuel
Consumption
(Gallons)
Passenger Vehicles 55.40% Gasoline 1,045,139 0.00 41,310 Light-Medium Duty Trucks 36.97% Gasoline 697,549 0.00 37,503 Heavy Trucks/Other 5.02% Diesel 94,646 0.00 12,453
Motorcycle 2.62% Gasoline 49,366 1,122 0.00
79,934
12,453
Sources:
[1] United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2021. National Transportation Statistics. Available at: https://www.bts.gov/topics/national-transportation-statistics.

0.000348

0.001150
Fleet Mix
Total Gasoline Consumption (gallons)
Total Diesel Consumption (gallons)
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan - Existing (2022)
Last Updated: December 2, 2022

0.003595

0.026165
Light Duty Auto (LDA)
Light Duty Truck 1 (LDT1)
Light Duty Truck 2 (LDT2)
Medium Duty Vehicle (MDV)
Light Heavy Duty 1 (LHD1)
Light Heavy Duty 2 (LHD2)
Medium Heavy Duty (MHD)
Heavy Heavy Duty (HHD)
Other Bus (OBUS)
Urban Bus (UBUS)
School Bus (SBUS)
Motorhome (MH)
Fleet Class
Populate one of the following tables (Leave the other blank):

Fuel Economy (MPG) [1]
Motorcycle (MCY)
Annual VMT Daily Vehicle Trips
Fleet Mix

0.553951

0.056244

0.181537

0.131938

0.024760

0.005449

0.007285

0.007018

0.000560

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1795 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) OR
Annual VMT: 3,018,600
Daily Vehicle
Trips:

Average Trip
Distance:

Passenger Vehicles 25.3
Light-Med Duty Trucks 18.6
Heavy Trucks/Other 7.6
Motorcycles 44
Vehicle Type Percent Fuel Type
Annual VMT:

VMT Vehicle Trips: VMT
Fuel
Consumption
(Gallons)
Passenger Vehicles 58.68% Gasoline 1,771,453 0.00 70,018 Light-Medium Duty Trucks 34.28% Gasoline 1,034,861 0.00 55,638 Heavy Trucks/Other 4.57% Diesel 138,098 0.00 18,171
Motorcycle 2.46% Gasoline 74,185 1,686 0.00
127,342
18,171
Sources:
[1] United States Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2021. National Transportation Statistics. Available at: https://www.bts.gov/topics/national-transportation-statistics.

Urban Bus (UBUS) 0.000264
Motorcycle (MCY) 0.024576
School Bus (SBUS) 0.002469
Motorhome (MH) 0.002558
Fleet Mix
Total Gasoline Consumption (gallons)
Total Diesel Consumption (gallons)
Medium Heavy Duty (MHD) 0.006953
Heavy Heavy Duty (HHD) 0.006514
Other Bus (OBUS) 0.000528
Medium Duty Vehicle (MDV) 0.114924
Light Heavy Duty 1 (LHD1) 0.020756
Light Heavy Duty 2 (LHD2) 0.005707
Light Duty Auto (LDA) 0.586846
Light Duty Truck 1 (LDT1) 0.055769
Light Duty Truck 2 (LDT2) 0.172135
Fleet Class Fleet Mix Fuel Economy (MPG) [1]
Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan - Buildout (2040)
Last Updated: December 2, 2022
Populate one of the following tables (Leave the other blank):

Annual VMT Daily Vehicle Trips

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1796 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix D
Noise Calculations

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1797 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) ID Leq-24hr Ldn CNEL 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Roadway Segment ADT Posted
Speed
Limit
Grade % Autos % Med
Trucks
% Heavy
Trucks
%
Daytime
% Evening % Night
Number
of Lanes
Site
Condition
Distance
to
Reciever
Ground
Absorptio
n
Lane
Distance
Daytime
Autos
Daytime
Med
Truck
Daytime
Heavy
Evening
Autos
Evening
Med
Truck
Evening
Heavy
Night
Autos
Night
Med
Truck
Night
Heavy
Autos
Med
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks
Equivalen
t Lane
Distance
Distance
Ref
Distance
Propag
Heavy
Truck
Grade
Autos
Med
Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos
Med
Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos
Med
Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos
Med
Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos
Med
Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos
Med
Truck
Heavy
Truck
Day Leq
Evening
Leq
Night Leq
1 64.1 66.2 66.8 31 66 142 Pacheco Blvd North of 1st Ave 17,000 35 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1152.3 15.3 8.2 555.3 7.4 4.0 129.6 1.7 0.9 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -0.1 -18.9 -21.6 -3.3 -22.1 -24.8 -9.6 -28.4 -31.1 65.0 56.0 58.5 61.9 52.8 55.3 55.5 46.5 49.0 66.3 63.2 56.8 2 60.7 62.8 63.4 18 39 84 Center Ave West of Pacheco Blvd 8,000 35 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 542.3 7.2 3.9 261.3 3.5 1.9 61.0 0.8 0.4 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -3.4 -22.2 -24.9 -6.6 -25.3 -28.0 -12.9 -31.7 -34.4 61.6 52.6 55.1 58.5 49.4 51.9 52.1 43.1 45.6 62.9 59.8 53.4 3 63.3 65.4 65.9 27 58 124 Chilpaningo Prkwy West of Pacheco Blvd 17,800 30 0.0% 98.3% 0.3% 1.4% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1210.2 3.7 17.2 583.2 1.8 8.3 136.1 0.4 1.9 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.8 -24.4 -17.7 -2.4 -27.6 -20.9 -8.7 -33.9 -27.2 63.3 48.8 61.1 60.2 45.6 57.9 53.8 39.3 51.6 65.5 62.3 56.0 4 65.2 67.3 67.8 36 77 166 Contra Costa Blvd South of Concord Ave 30,000 30 0.0% 97.4% 1.8% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2021.1 37.4 14.5 974.0 18.0 7.0 227.3 4.2 1.6 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 3.0 -14.4 -18.5 -0.2 -17.5 -21.6 -6.5 -23.8 -27.9 65.5 58.8 60.4 62.4 55.6 57.2 56.1 49.3 50.9 67.4 64.2 57.9 5 61.6 63.7 64.2 21 44 96 Golf Club Road West of Pacheco Blvd 13,100 30 0.0% 97.4% 1.8% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 882.5 16.3 6.3 425.3 7.9 3.1 99.2 1.8 0.7 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -0.6 -18.0 -22.1 -3.8 -21.1 -25.2 -10.1 -27.4 -31.5 61.9 55.2 56.8 58.8 52.0 53.6 52.5 45.7 47.3 63.8 60.6 54.3 6 61.1 63.2 63.8 19 42 89 Morello Ave North of Paso Nogal Rd 8,600 35 0.0% 98.2% 0.9% 0.9% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 584.1 5.4 5.4 281.5 2.6 2.6 65.7 0.6 0.6 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -3.1 -23.5 -23.5 -6.3 -26.6 -26.6 -12.6 -33.0 -33.0 62.0 51.3 56.5 58.8 48.1 53.3 52.5 41.8 47.0 63.3 60.2 53.8 7 54.2 56.3 56.9 7 14 31 Paso Nogal Rd East of Morello Ave 3,900 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 264.4 3.5 1.9 127.4 1.7 0.9 29.7 0.4 0.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -5.1 -23.8 -26.5 -8.2 -27.0 -29.7 -14.6 -33.3 -36.0 54.3 47.2 50.6 51.1 44.0 47.5 44.8 37.7 41.2 56.4 53.2 46.9 8 53.6 55.8 56.3 6 13 28 Paso Nogal Rd East of Alhambra Ave 5,000 25 0.0% 99.7% 0.2% 0.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 344.8 0.7 0.3 166.2 0.3 0.2 38.8 0.1 0.0 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -3.9 -30.9 -33.9 -7.1 -34.1 -37.1 -13.4 -40.4 -43.4 55.5 40.1 43.3 52.3 37.0 40.1 46.0 30.6 33.8 55.8 52.7 46.3 9 55.8 57.9 58.4 8 18 39 Viking Dr West of Contra Costa Blvd 7,200 25 0.0% 99.3% 0.4% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 494.5 2.0 1.5 238.3 1.0 0.7 55.6 0.2 0.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -2.3 -26.3 -27.5 -5.5 -29.5 -30.7 -11.8 -35.8 -37.0 57.0 44.7 49.6 53.9 41.6 46.5 47.5 35.2 40.1 58.0 54.8 48.5 10 58.4 60.6 61.1 13 27 59 Morello Ave South of Viking Dr 8,800 30 0.0% 99.6% 0.2% 0.2% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 606.2 1.2 1.2 292.2 0.6 0.6 68.2 0.1 0.1 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -2.3 -29.2 -29.2 -5.4 -32.4 -32.4 -11.7 -38.7 -38.7 60.2 43.8 49.5 57.0 40.6 46.3 50.7 34.3 40.0 60.6 57.5 51.1 11 56.4 58.6 59.1 9 20 43 Norse Dr North of Taylor Blvd 6,500 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 440.6 5.8 3.1 212.3 2.8 1.5 49.5 0.7 0.4 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -2.8 -21.6 -24.3 -6.0 -24.8 -27.5 -12.3 -31.1 -33.8 56.5 49.4 52.9 53.4 46.2 49.7 47.0 39.9 43.4 58.6 55.5 49.1 12 67.7 69.9 70.4 53 114 247 Taylor Blvd West of Contra Costa Blvd 23,200 40 0.0% 97.5% 0.4% 2.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1564.6 6.4 33.7 754.0 3.1 16.2 175.9 0.7 3.8 67.4 76.3 81.2 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.6 -23.3 -16.1 -2.6 -26.4 -19.2 -8.9 -32.7 -25.5 68.0 53.1 65.2 64.9 49.9 62.0 58.5 43.6 55.7 69.9 66.8 60.4 13 65.5 67.6 68.1 38 81 174 Contra Costa Blvd North of Beth Dr 21,600 35 0.0% 98.4% 0.3% 1.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1470.1 4.5 19.4 708.5 2.2 9.4 165.3 0.5 2.2 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.9 -24.2 -17.9 -2.2 -27.4 -21.0 -8.6 -33.7 -27.4 66.1 50.7 62.2 62.9 47.5 59.1 56.6 41.2 52.7 67.7 64.5 58.2 14 57.4 59.6 60.1 11 24 51 Ellinwood Dr East of Cotra Costa Blvd 8,200 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 555.8 7.4 4.0 267.9 3.6 1.9 62.5 0.8 0.4 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.8 -20.6 -23.3 -5.0 -23.8 -26.5 -11.3 -30.1 -32.8 57.5 50.4 53.9 54.4 47.2 50.7 48.0 40.9 44.4 59.6 56.5 50.1 15 53.2 55.3 55.9 6 12 27 Lucille Lane North of Maureen Ln 3,100 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 210.1 2.8 1.5 101.3 1.3 0.7 23.6 0.3 0.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -6.1 -24.8 -27.5 -9.2 -28.0 -30.7 -15.6 -34.3 -37.0 53.3 46.2 49.6 50.1 43.0 46.5 43.8 36.7 40.2 55.4 52.2 45.9 16 66.7 68.8 69.4 45 98 210 Taylor Blvd East of Alhambra Ave 19,800 40 0.0% 98.0% 0.4% 1.6% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1342.1 5.5 21.9 646.8 2.6 10.6 150.9 0.6 2.5 67.4 76.3 81.2 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.0 -23.9 -17.9 -3.2 -27.1 -21.1 -9.5 -33.4 -27.4 67.4 52.4 63.3 64.2 49.3 60.1 57.9 42.9 53.8 68.9 65.7 59.4 17 67.2 69.3 69.8 49 105 227 Pleasant Hill Rd North of Taylor Blvd 27,200 35 0.0% 97.5% 0.4% 2.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1834.3 7.5 39.5 884.0 3.6 19.0 206.3 0.8 4.4 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 1.9 -22.0 -14.8 -1.3 -25.2 -17.9 -7.6 -31.5 -24.3 67.1 52.9 65.3 63.9 49.7 62.2 57.6 43.4 55.8 69.4 66.2 59.9 18 69.6 71.7 72.3 71 153 329 Taylor Blvd West of Alhambra Ave 19,000 50 0.0% 96.3% 0.4% 3.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1265.5 5.3 43.4 609.9 2.5 20.9 142.3 0.6 4.9 71.1 78.8 83.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -1.3 -25.1 -15.9 -4.4 -28.3 -19.1 -10.8 -34.6 -25.4 69.9 53.8 67.2 66.7 50.6 64.0 60.4 44.3 57.7 71.8 68.7 62.3 19 64.0 66.1 66.7 30 65 139 Pleasant Hill Rd North of Grayson Rd 15,900 35 0.0% 98.4% 0.5% 1.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1082.2 5.5 12.1 521.5 2.7 5.8 121.7 0.6 1.4 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -0.4 -23.3 -19.9 -3.6 -26.5 -23.1 -9.9 -32.8 -29.4 64.8 51.5 60.2 61.6 48.4 57.0 55.3 42.1 50.7 66.2 63.0 56.7 20 67.2 69.3 69.9 49 106 228 Taylor Blvd South of Grayson Rd 21,600 40 0.0% 97.8% 0.4% 1.8% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1461.1 6.0 26.9 704.2 2.9 13.0 164.3 0.7 3.0 67.4 76.3 81.2 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.3 -23.6 -17.0 -2.8 -26.7 -20.2 -9.2 -33.1 -26.5 67.7 52.8 64.2 64.6 49.6 61.0 58.2 43.3 54.7 69.4 66.3 59.9 21 61.6 63.7 64.3 21 45 96 Gregory Ln East of Pleasant Hill Rd 13,300 30 0.0% 98.3% 0.6% 1.0% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 904.3 5.5 9.2 435.8 2.7 4.4 101.7 0.6 1.0 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -0.5 -22.7 -20.4 -3.7 -25.8 -23.6 -10.0 -32.1 -29.9 62.1 50.5 58.4 58.9 47.3 55.2 52.6 41.0 48.9 63.8 60.6 54.3 22 62.9 65.0 65.6 25 55 118 Gregory Ln West of Cleaveland Rd 16,700 30 0.0% 98.2% 0.5% 1.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1134.3 5.8 15.0 546.6 2.8 7.2 127.6 0.6 1.7 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.5 -22.5 -18.3 -2.7 -25.6 -21.5 -9.0 -32.0 -27.8 63.0 50.7 60.5 59.9 47.5 57.3 53.5 41.2 51.0 65.1 62.0 55.6 23 59.2 61.3 61.9 14 31 66 Cleaveland Rd South of Gregory Ln 9,300 30 0.0% 98.9% 0.8% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 636.2 5.1 1.9 306.6 2.5 0.9 71.5 0.6 0.2 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -2.0 -23.0 -27.2 -5.2 -26.1 -30.4 -11.5 -32.5 -36.7 60.5 50.2 51.6 57.4 47.0 48.4 51.0 40.7 42.1 61.4 58.2 51.9 24 67.8 69.9 70.5 54 116 250 Contra Costa Blvd North of Monument Blvd 30,600 35 0.0% 97.5% 0.6% 1.9% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 6 Soft 50 0.5 68 2063.6 12.7 40.2 994.5 6.1 19.4 232.1 1.4 4.5 65.1 74.8 80.0 94.0 -4.2 4.5 0 2.4 -19.7 -14.7 -0.8 -22.9 -17.9 -7.1 -29.2 -24.2 67.8 55.4 65.6 64.6 52.2 62.5 58.3 45.9 56.1 70.0 66.8 60.5 25 60.5 62.6 63.2 18 38 82 Boyd Rd West of Cleaveland Rd 16,700 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1132.0 15.0 8.1 545.5 7.2 3.9 127.3 1.7 0.9 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 1.3 -17.5 -20.2 -1.9 -20.7 -23.4 -8.2 -27.0 -29.7 60.6 53.5 57.0 57.5 50.3 53.8 51.1 44.0 47.5 62.7 59.6 53.2 26 68.4 70.5 71.0 59 127 273 Monument Blvd East of Buskirk Ave 45,300 35 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 3070.6 40.7 21.9 1479.8 19.6 10.6 345.3 4.6 2.5 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 4.1 -14.6 -17.3 1.0 -17.8 -20.5 -5.4 -24.1 -26.8 69.3 60.2 62.8 66.1 57.1 59.6 59.8 50.7 53.3 70.6 67.4 61.1 27 63.7 65.8 66.4 29 62 133 Buskirk Ave South of Monument Blvd 25,800 30 0.0% 98.7% 1.0% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1761.3 17.8 5.4 848.8 8.6 2.6 198.1 2.0 0.6 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 2.4 -17.6 -22.8 -0.8 -20.7 -26.0 -7.1 -27.1 -32.3 65.0 55.6 56.0 61.8 52.4 52.9 55.5 46.1 46.5 65.9 62.7 56.4 28 61.2 63.3 63.9 19 42 90 Hookston Rd East of Buskirk Ave 14,100 30 0.0% 98.9% 0.5% 0.6% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 964.5 4.9 5.9 464.8 2.4 2.8 108.5 0.5 0.7 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -0.2 -23.2 -22.4 -3.4 -26.4 -25.6 -9.7 -32.7 -31.9 62.2 49.8 56.3 59.0 46.7 53.1 52.7 40.4 46.8 63.4 60.2 53.9 29 58.9 61.1 61.6 14 30 64 Buskirk Ave South of Mayhew Way 8,900 30 0.0% 98.7% 1.0% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 607.6 6.2 1.8 292.8 3.0 0.9 68.3 0.7 0.2 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -2.2 -22.2 -27.4 -5.4 -25.4 -30.6 -11.7 -31.7 -36.9 60.2 50.9 51.3 57.0 47.7 48.1 50.7 41.4 41.8 61.1 58.0 51.7 30 61.3 63.4 64.0 20 43 92 Oak Park Blvd West of Hook Ave 14,400 30 0.0% 99.1% 0.2% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 987.0 2.0 7.0 475.7 1.0 3.4 111.0 0.2 0.8 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -0.1 -27.1 -21.6 -3.3 -30.3 -24.8 -9.6 -36.6 -31.1 62.3 46.0 57.0 59.1 42.8 53.9 52.8 36.5 47.6 63.5 60.3 54.0 31 57.0 59.1 59.6 10 22 47 Patterson Blvd North of Oak Park Blvd 5,500 30 0.0% 99.0% 0.5% 0.5% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 376.6 1.9 1.9 181.5 0.9 0.9 42.4 0.2 0.2 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -4.3 -27.3 -27.3 -7.5 -30.5 -30.5 -13.8 -36.8 -36.8 58.1 45.8 51.4 55.0 42.6 48.2 48.6 36.3 41.9 59.2 56.0 49.7 32 61.5 63.7 64.2 21 44 95 Pleasant Hill Rd North of Oak Park Blvd 8,200 40 0.0% 99.4% 0.5% 0.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 563.8 2.8 0.6 271.7 1.4 0.3 63.4 0.3 0.1 67.4 76.3 81.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -3.8 -26.8 -33.8 -7.0 -30.0 -37.0 -13.3 -36.3 -43.3 63.5 49.4 47.3 60.3 46.3 44.1 54.0 40.0 37.8 63.7 60.6 54.2 33 61.3 63.4 63.9 20 42 91 Oak Park Blvd East of Pleasant Hill Rd 10,500 35 0.0% 99.4% 0.2% 0.4% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 721.9 1.5 2.9 347.9 0.7 1.4 81.2 0.2 0.3 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -2.2 -29.1 -26.1 -5.3 -32.3 -29.3 -11.7 -38.6 -35.6 62.9 45.6 53.9 59.7 42.5 50.7 53.4 36.1 44.4 63.5 60.3 54.0 34 62.2 64.3 64.9 23 49 105 Geary Rd East of Pleasant Hill Rd 12,600 35 0.0% 99.2% 0.3% 0.5% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 864.5 2.6 4.4 416.6 1.3 2.1 97.2 0.3 0.5 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.4 -26.6 -24.4 -4.5 -29.7 -27.5 -10.9 -36.1 -33.8 63.7 48.2 55.6 60.5 45.0 52.4 54.2 38.7 46.1 64.4 61.2 54.9 35 70.4 72.5 73.0 79 171 369 Taylor Blvd South of Withers Ave 22,500 55 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1525.1 20.2 10.9 735.0 9.8 5.3 171.5 2.3 1.2 72.7 79.9 83.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -0.9 -19.6 -22.3 -4.0 -22.8 -25.5 -10.4 -29.1 -31.8 71.9 60.3 61.5 68.7 57.1 58.4 62.4 50.8 52.0 72.6 69.4 63.1 36 83.6 85.7 86.2 604 1302 2806
I-680 North of N Main Street, Walnut
Creek 272,500 65 0.0% 97.0% 1.3% 1.4% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 6 Soft 50 0.5 68 18282.5 245.0 263.9 8810.8 118.1 127.2 2055.9 27.6 29.7 75.5 81.7 85.2 94.0 -4.2 4.5 0 9.2 -9.5 -9.2 6.0 -12.7 -12.4 -0.3 -19.0 -18.7 85.0 72.5 76.3 81.9 69.3 73.1 75.5 63.0 66.8 85.8 82.6 76.3 Calculation Area
dBA at 50 feet Distance to CNEL Contour Vehicles per Hour Reference Level Traffic Noise Calculator: FHWA 77-108 Project Title: 18-06115 (Pleasant Hill GP) - Exsiting 2022 Output
Inputs Auto Inputs
Distance Adjustments Flow: Daytime Flow: Evening Flow: Night Totals: Daytime Totals: Evening Totals: Night Time of Day Averages

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1798 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) ID Leq-24hr Ldn CNEL 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Roadway Segment ADT Posted
Speed
Limit
Grade % Autos % Med
Trucks
% Heavy
Trucks
% Daytime % Evening % Night
Number of
Lanes
Site
Condition
Distance
to
Reciever
Ground
Absorptio
n
Lane
Distance
Daytime
Autos
Daytime
Med Truck
Daytime
Heavy
Evening
Autos
Evening
Med Truck
Evening
Heavy
Night
Autos
Night Med
Truck
Night
Heavy
Autos
Med
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks
Equivalent
Lane
Distance
Distance
Ref
Distance
Propag
Heavy
Truck
Grade
Autos Med Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos Med Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos Med Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos Med Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos Med Truck
Heavy
Truck
Autos Med Truck
Heavy
Truck
Day Leq
Evening
Leq
Night Leq
1 65.6 67.7 68.2 38 82 176 Pacheco Blvd North of 1st Ave 23,600 35 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1599.7 21.2 11.4 770.9 10.2 5.5 179.9 2.4 1.3 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 1.3 -17.5 -20.2 -1.9 -20.6 -23.3 -8.2 -27.0 -29.7 66.5 57.4 59.9 63.3 54.2 56.8 57.0 47.9 50.4 67.8 64.6 58.3 2 60.8 63.0 63.5 18 40 86 Center Ave West of Pacheco Blvd 8,200 35 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 555.8 7.4 4.0 267.9 3.6 1.9 62.5 0.8 0.4 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -3.3 -22.1 -24.8 -6.5 -25.2 -27.9 -12.8 -31.6 -34.2 61.7 52.7 55.2 58.6 49.5 52.0 52.2 43.2 45.7 63.0 59.9 53.5 3 64.4 66.5 67.0 32 68 147 Chilpaningo Prkwy West of Pacheco Blvd 23,000 30 0.0% 98.3% 0.3% 1.4% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1563.8 4.8 22.3 753.6 2.3 10.7 175.8 0.5 2.5 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 1.9 -23.3 -16.6 -1.3 -26.5 -19.8 -7.6 -32.8 -26.1 64.4 49.9 62.2 61.3 46.7 59.0 54.9 40.4 52.7 66.6 63.4 57.1 4 66.4 68.5 69.0 43 93 200 Contra Costa Blvd South of Concord Ave 39,700 30 0.0% 97.4% 1.8% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2674.5 49.4 19.2 1288.9 23.8 9.3 300.7 5.6 2.2 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 4.2 -13.1 -17.2 1.0 -16.3 -20.4 -5.3 -22.6 -26.7 66.8 60.0 61.6 63.6 56.9 58.4 57.3 50.5 52.1 68.6 65.4 59.1 5 62.3 64.5 65.0 23 50 108 Golf Club Road West of Pacheco Blvd 15,700 30 0.0% 97.4% 1.8% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1057.7 19.5 7.6 509.7 9.4 3.7 118.9 2.2 0.9 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.2 -17.2 -21.3 -3.0 -20.3 -24.4 -9.3 -26.7 -30.8 62.7 56.0 57.5 59.6 52.8 54.4 53.2 46.5 48.1 64.5 61.4 55.0 6 62.4 64.5 65.1 23 50 109 Morello Ave North of Paso Nogal Rd 11,500 35 0.0% 98.2% 0.9% 0.9% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 781.1 7.2 7.2 376.4 3.5 3.5 87.8 0.8 0.8 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.8 -22.2 -22.2 -5.0 -25.4 -25.4 -11.3 -31.7 -31.7 63.2 52.6 57.8 60.0 49.4 54.6 53.7 43.1 48.3 64.6 61.4 55.1 7 57.6 59.8 60.3 11 24 52 Paso Nogal Rd East of Morello Ave 8,600 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 582.9 7.7 4.2 280.9 3.7 2.0 65.6 0.9 0.5 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.6 -20.4 -23.1 -4.8 -23.6 -26.3 -11.1 -29.9 -32.6 57.7 50.6 54.1 54.6 47.4 50.9 48.2 41.1 44.6 59.8 56.7 50.4 8 54.3 56.5 57.0 7 15 32 Paso Nogal Rd East of Alhambra Ave 5,900 25 0.0% 99.7% 0.2% 0.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 406.9 0.8 0.4 196.1 0.4 0.2 45.8 0.1 0.0 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -3.2 -30.2 -33.2 -6.4 -33.3 -36.3 -12.7 -39.7 -42.7 56.2 40.8 44.0 53.0 37.7 40.8 46.7 31.4 34.5 56.6 53.4 47.1 9 56.8 58.9 59.4 10 21 46 Viking Dr West of Contra Costa Blvd 9,100 25 0.0% 99.3% 0.4% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 625.0 2.5 1.9 301.2 1.2 0.9 70.3 0.3 0.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.3 -25.3 -26.5 -4.5 -28.4 -29.7 -10.8 -34.8 -36.0 58.0 45.7 50.6 54.9 42.6 47.5 48.6 36.2 41.2 59.0 55.8 49.5 10 60.7 62.8 63.4 18 39 84 Morello Ave South of Viking Dr 14,800 30 0.0% 99.6% 0.2% 0.2% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1019.6 2.0 2.0 491.4 1.0 1.0 114.7 0.2 0.2 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 0.0 -27.0 -27.0 -3.2 -30.1 -30.1 -9.5 -36.5 -36.5 62.4 46.1 51.7 59.3 42.9 48.6 53.0 36.6 42.2 62.9 59.7 53.4 11 58.1 60.2 60.8 12 26 56 Norse Dr North of Taylor Blvd 9,600 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 650.7 8.6 4.6 313.6 4.2 2.2 73.2 1.0 0.5 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.2 -19.9 -22.6 -4.3 -23.1 -25.8 -10.6 -29.4 -32.1 58.2 51.1 54.6 55.0 47.9 51.4 48.7 41.6 45.1 60.3 57.2 50.8 12 69.4 71.6 72.1 69 149 321 Taylor Blvd West of Contra Costa Blvd 34,400 40 0.0% 97.5% 0.4% 2.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2319.9 9.5 50.0 1118.0 4.6 24.1 260.9 1.1 5.6 67.4 76.3 81.2 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 2.3 -21.5 -14.3 -0.8 -24.7 -17.5 -7.2 -31.0 -23.8 69.7 54.8 66.9 66.6 51.7 63.7 60.3 45.3 57.4 71.6 68.5 62.2 13 67.8 69.9 70.5 54 116 250 Contra Costa Blvd North of Beth Dr 37,100 35 0.0% 98.4% 0.3% 1.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2525.0 7.7 33.4 1216.9 3.7 16.1 283.9 0.9 3.8 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 3.3 -21.9 -15.5 0.1 -25.1 -18.7 -6.2 -31.4 -25.0 68.4 53.0 64.6 65.3 49.8 61.4 59.0 43.5 55.1 70.0 66.9 60.5 14 60.3 62.4 63.0 17 37 79 Ellinwood Dr East of Cotra Costa Blvd 15,900 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1077.8 14.3 7.7 519.4 6.9 3.7 121.2 1.6 0.9 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 1.0 -17.7 -20.4 -2.1 -20.9 -23.6 -8.5 -27.2 -29.9 60.4 53.3 56.7 57.2 50.1 53.6 50.9 43.8 47.3 62.5 59.3 53.0 15 58.0 60.2 60.7 12 26 56 Lucille Lane North of Maureen Ln 9,400 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 637.2 8.5 4.6 307.1 4.1 2.2 71.6 1.0 0.5 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.2 -20.0 -22.7 -4.4 -23.2 -25.9 -10.7 -29.5 -32.2 58.1 51.0 54.5 55.0 47.8 51.3 48.6 41.5 45.0 60.2 57.1 50.7 16 68.3 70.5 71.0 58 126 271 Taylor Blvd East of Alhambra Ave 29,800 40 0.0% 98.0% 0.4% 1.6% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 2019.9 8.2 33.0 973.5 4.0 15.9 227.1 0.9 3.7 67.4 76.3 81.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 1.7 -22.2 -16.1 -1.4 -25.3 -19.3 -7.8 -31.7 -25.6 69.0 54.1 64.9 65.8 50.9 61.8 59.5 44.6 55.5 70.5 67.4 61.1 17 68.0 70.1 70.6 55 118 255 Pleasant Hill Rd North of Taylor Blvd 32,500 35 0.0% 97.5% 0.4% 2.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2191.7 9.0 47.2 1056.3 4.3 22.8 246.5 1.0 5.3 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 2.7 -21.2 -14.0 -0.5 -24.4 -17.2 -6.8 -30.7 -23.5 67.8 53.7 66.1 64.7 50.5 62.9 58.3 44.2 56.6 70.2 67.0 60.7 18 71.2 73.3 73.9 91 195 421 Taylor Blvd West of Alhambra Ave 27,400 50 0.0% 96.3% 0.4% 3.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1825.0 7.6 62.5 879.5 3.7 30.1 205.2 0.9 7.0 71.1 78.8 83.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.3 -23.5 -14.3 -2.9 -26.7 -17.5 -9.2 -33.0 -23.8 71.5 55.4 68.7 68.3 52.2 65.6 62.0 45.9 59.3 73.4 70.2 63.9 19 65.5 67.6 68.1 38 81 174 Pleasant Hill Rd North of Grayson Rd 22,300 35 0.0% 98.4% 0.5% 1.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1517.7 7.7 17.0 731.4 3.7 8.2 170.7 0.9 1.9 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 1.1 -21.9 -18.5 -2.1 -25.0 -21.6 -8.4 -31.4 -27.9 66.2 53.0 61.7 63.1 49.8 58.5 56.7 43.5 52.2 67.7 64.5 58.2 20 68.6 70.7 71.2 60 130 280 Taylor Blvd South of Grayson Rd 29,400 40 0.0% 97.8% 0.4% 1.8% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1988.8 8.1 36.6 958.4 3.9 17.6 223.6 0.9 4.1 67.4 76.3 81.2 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 1.7 -22.2 -15.7 -1.5 -25.4 -18.9 -7.8 -31.7 -25.2 69.1 54.1 65.5 65.9 51.0 62.4 59.6 44.7 56.0 70.8 67.6 61.3 21 63.0 65.2 65.7 26 56 120 Gregory Ln East of Pleasant Hill Rd 18,500 30 0.0% 98.3% 0.6% 1.0% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1257.8 7.7 12.8 606.2 3.7 6.2 141.4 0.9 1.4 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.9 -21.2 -19.0 -2.3 -24.4 -22.2 -8.6 -30.7 -28.5 63.5 51.9 59.8 60.3 48.8 56.6 54.0 42.5 50.3 65.2 62.1 55.8 22 65.2 67.4 67.9 36 78 168 Gregory Ln West of Cleaveland Rd 28,400 30 0.0% 98.2% 0.5% 1.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 1929.0 9.8 25.5 929.6 4.7 12.3 216.9 1.1 2.9 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 2.8 -20.2 -16.0 -0.4 -23.3 -19.2 -6.7 -29.6 -25.5 65.3 53.0 62.8 62.2 49.8 59.6 55.9 43.5 53.3 67.4 64.3 57.9 23 61.0 63.1 63.6 19 41 87 Cleaveland Rd South of Gregory Ln 14,000 30 0.0% 98.9% 0.8% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 957.7 7.7 2.9 461.5 3.7 1.4 107.7 0.9 0.3 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 -0.3 -21.2 -25.4 -3.4 -24.4 -28.6 -9.8 -30.7 -34.9 62.3 52.0 53.4 59.1 48.8 50.2 52.8 42.5 43.9 63.2 60.0 53.7 24 70.2 72.4 72.9 78 168 363 Contra Costa Blvd North of Monument Blvd 53,500 35 0.0% 97.5% 0.6% 1.9% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 6 Soft 50 0.5 68 3607.9 22.2 70.3 1738.8 10.7 33.9 405.7 2.5 7.9 65.1 74.8 80.0 94.0 -4.2 4.5 0 4.8 -17.3 -12.3 1.7 -20.5 -15.4 -4.7 -26.8 -21.8 70.2 57.8 68.1 67.1 54.7 64.9 60.7 48.4 58.6 72.4 69.3 63.0 25 61.7 63.8 64.3 21 45 97 Boyd Rd West of Cleaveland Rd 21,700 25 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1470.9 19.5 10.5 708.9 9.4 5.1 165.4 2.2 1.2 59.4 71.1 77.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 2.4 -16.4 -19.1 -0.8 -19.6 -22.2 -7.1 -25.9 -28.6 61.8 54.6 58.1 58.6 51.5 54.9 52.3 45.1 48.6 63.9 60.7 54.4 26 68.7 70.8 71.4 62 133 287 Monument Blvd East of Buskirk Ave 49,000 35 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 3321.4 44.1 23.7 1600.7 21.2 11.4 373.5 5.0 2.7 65.1 74.8 80.0 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 4.5 -14.3 -17.0 1.3 -17.5 -20.2 -5.0 -23.8 -26.5 69.6 60.6 63.1 66.5 57.4 59.9 60.1 51.1 53.6 70.9 67.8 61.4 27 64.5 66.6 67.1 32 69 149 Buskirk Ave South of Monument Blvd 30,800 30 0.0% 98.7% 1.0% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2102.6 21.3 6.4 1013.3 10.3 3.1 236.4 2.4 0.7 62.5 73.1 78.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 3.2 -16.8 -22.0 0.0 -20.0 -25.2 -6.3 -26.3 -31.5 65.7 56.4 56.8 62.5 53.2 53.6 56.2 46.9 47.3 66.7 63.5 57.2 28 61.4 63.6 64.1 20 44 94 Hookston Rd East of Buskirk Ave 14,900 30 0.0% 98.9% 0.5% 0.6% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1019.2 5.2 6.2 491.2 2.5 3.0 114.6 0.6 0.7 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 0.0 -23.0 -22.2 -3.2 -26.1 -25.3 -9.5 -32.4 -31.7 62.4 50.1 56.5 59.3 46.9 53.4 53.0 40.6 47.0 63.6 60.5 54.1 29 60.4 62.5 63.0 17 37 79 Buskirk Ave South of Mayhew Way 12,300 30 0.0% 98.7% 1.0% 0.3% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 839.7 8.5 2.6 404.7 4.1 1.2 94.4 1.0 0.3 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -0.8 -20.8 -26.0 -4.0 -23.9 -29.2 -10.3 -30.3 -35.5 61.6 52.3 52.7 58.4 49.1 49.5 52.1 42.8 43.2 62.6 59.4 53.1 30 62.7 64.8 65.3 24 52 113 Oak Park Blvd West of Hook Ave 19,600 30 0.0% 99.1% 0.2% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1343.5 2.7 9.5 647.5 1.3 4.6 151.1 0.3 1.1 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 1.2 -25.7 -20.3 -2.0 -28.9 -23.5 -8.3 -35.2 -29.8 63.6 47.3 58.4 60.5 44.1 55.2 54.2 37.8 48.9 64.9 61.7 55.4 31 58.7 60.8 61.4 13 29 62 Patterson Blvd North of Oak Park Blvd 8,200 30 0.0% 99.0% 0.5% 0.5% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 561.5 2.8 2.8 270.6 1.4 1.4 63.1 0.3 0.3 62.5 73.1 78.8 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -2.6 -25.6 -25.6 -5.8 -28.7 -28.7 -12.1 -35.0 -35.0 59.9 47.5 53.1 56.7 44.3 50.0 50.4 38.0 43.6 60.9 57.7 51.4 32 63.7 65.8 66.3 28 61 132 Pleasant Hill Rd North of Oak Park Blvd 13,400 40 0.0% 99.4% 0.5% 0.1% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 921.3 4.6 0.9 444.0 2.2 0.4 103.6 0.5 0.1 67.4 76.3 81.2 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.7 -24.7 -31.7 -4.9 -27.8 -34.8 -11.2 -34.2 -41.1 65.6 51.6 49.4 62.4 48.4 46.3 56.1 42.1 39.9 65.9 62.7 56.4 33 62.9 65.0 65.5 25 54 117 Oak Park Blvd East of Pleasant Hill Rd 15,200 35 0.0% 99.4% 0.2% 0.4% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 1045.0 2.1 4.2 503.6 1.0 2.0 117.5 0.2 0.5 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -0.6 -27.5 -24.5 -3.7 -30.7 -27.7 -10.0 -37.0 -34.0 64.5 47.2 55.5 61.3 44.1 52.3 55.0 37.7 46.0 65.1 61.9 55.6 34 62.2 64.3 64.9 23 49 105 Geary Rd East of Pleasant Hill Rd 12,600 35 0.0% 99.2% 0.3% 0.5% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 2 Soft 50 0.5 20 864.5 2.6 4.4 416.6 1.3 2.1 97.2 0.3 0.5 65.1 74.8 80.0 99.5 -4.6 4.5 0 -1.4 -26.6 -24.4 -4.5 -29.7 -27.5 -10.9 -36.1 -33.8 63.7 48.2 55.6 60.5 45.0 52.4 54.2 38.7 46.1 64.4 61.2 54.9 35 71.6 73.7 74.3 96 208 447 Taylor Blvd South of Withers Ave 30,100 55 0.0% 98.0% 1.3% 0.7% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4 Soft 50 0.5 44 2040.3 27.1 14.6 983.3 13.0 7.0 229.4 3.0 1.6 72.7 79.9 83.8 97.5 -4.5 4.5 0 0.4 -18.4 -21.1 -2.8 -21.6 -24.2 -9.1 -27.9 -30.6 73.2 61.5 62.8 70.0 58.4 59.6 63.7 52.0 53.3 73.8 70.6 64.3 36 84.1 86.2 86.8 657 1415 3049 I-680
North of N Main Street,
Walnut Creek 308,700 65 0.0% 97.0% 1.3% 1.4% 83.0% 10.0% 7.0% 6 Soft 50 0.5 68 20711.2 277.6 298.9 9981.3 133.8 144.1 2329.0 31.2 33.6 75.5 81.7 85.2 94.0 -4.2 4.5 0 9.7 -9.0 -8.7 6.6 -12.2 -11.8 0.2 -18.5 -18.2 85.6 73.0 76.8 82.4 69.8 73.7 76.1 63.5 67.3 86.3 83.1 76.8 Calculation Area
dBA at 50 feet Distance to CNEL Contour Vehicles per Hour Reference Level Traffic Noise Calculator: FHWA 77-108 Project Title: 18-06115 (Pleasant Hill GP) - 2040 Buildout Output
Inputs Auto Inputs
Distance Adjustments Flow: Daytime Flow: Evening Flow: Night Totals: Daytime Totals: Evening Totals: Night Time of Day Averages

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1799 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix
E
Transportation Impact Analysis Report

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1800 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) City of Pleasant Hill
2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
Prepared for:

City of Pleasant Hill
January 2023
WC19-3586

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1801 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Table of Contents

1. Existing Setting......................................................................................................................1

1.1 Physical Setting......................................................................................................................................................................1

1.1.1 Roadway Network.....................................................................................................................................................1

1.1.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities..........................................................................................................................5

1.1.3 Public Transportation ............................................................................................................................................10

1.1.4 Aviation Facilities.....................................................................................................................................................10

1.2 Regulatory Setting..............................................................................................................................................................12

1.2.1 Federal.........................................................................................................................................................................12

1.2.2 State .............................................................................................................................................................................12

1.2.3 Regional......................................................................................................................................................................14

1.2.4 Local .............................................................................................................................................................................16

2. Transportation Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................................................17

2.1.1 Transportation Impact Assessment Pursuant to CEQA............................................................................17

2.1.2 Significance Criteria and Thresholds ...............................................................................................................18

2.1.3 VMT Impact Methodology and Assumptions..............................................................................................19

2.1.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures....................................................................................................................21

3. References ...........................................................................................................................48 Appendices
Appendix 1: VMT Analysis Flowchart
Appendix 2: Detailed Land Uses for Transportation Analysis Scenarios

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1802 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) List of Figures
Figure 1: Roadway Network .............................................................................................................................................................2 Figure 2: Bicycle Facilities ..................................................................................................................................................................7 Figure 3: Recommended Pedestrian Improvements ..............................................................................................................9 Figure 4: Transit Routes .................................................................................................................................................................. 11 List of Tables
Table 1: City of Pleasant Hill Land Use Summary ................................................................................................................. 36 Table 2: Citywide Home-Based VMT Summary..................................................................................................................... 36 Table 3: Citywide Home-Work VMT Summary...................................................................................................................... 37 Table 4: Countywide VMT Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 38 Table 5: VMT Reduction Mitigation Measures....................................................................................................................... 39

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1803 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
1 1. Existing Setting
In this Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) report, the Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan is referred to as the plan, and the Pleasant Hill sphere of influence is referred to as the plan area. This chapter includes a description of the physical and regulatory transportation setting for the Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan transportation impacts with respect to all modes of travel (vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit).

1.1 Physical Setting

1.1.1 Roadway Network
The roadway network serving the plan area is shown in Figure 1. Key roadways are described below.

1.1.1.1 State Highways
Interstate 680 (I-680) is a north-south freeway which generally runs along the eastern edge of Pleasant Hill and connects I-80 in Fairfield to US 101 and I-280 in Santa Clara County.

State Route 4 (SR 4) is an east-west four-to-six-lane freeway which connects I-80 in Pinole to eastern Contra Costa County and San Joaquin County.

State Route 242 (SR 242) is a north-south freeway that traverses through the east side of Pleasant Hill connecting I-680 to State Route 4 (SR 4).

State Route 24 (SR 24) is an east–west California Scenic Highway that serves the eastern San Francisco Bay Area. This freeway connects the Interstate 580/Interstate 980 interchange in Oakland to the Interstate 680 junction in Walnut Creek. Both Taylor Boulevard and Pleasant Hill Road traversing through the City of Pleasant Hill intersect SR 24 via the City of Lafayette.

1.1.1.2 Arterials and Collectors
As described in the City of Pleasant Hill General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element, arterials are major streets carrying the traffic of local and collector streets to and from freeways and other major streets. Collectors are streets for traffic moving between arterial and local streets, generally providing direct access to properties. Local streets provide direct access to properties and are often designed to discourage commute traffic. Key arterials and collectors in the City, as described in the City of Pleasant Hill General Plan Transportation and Circulation Element (August, 2022) are described below.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1804 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element)

TAYLOR BOULEVARD

VIKING DRIVE ALHAMBRA AVENUE

RELIEZ VALLEY ROAD

GEARY ROAD

BOYD ROAD

PLEASANT HILL ROAD

LUCILLE LANE

CLEAVELAND ROAD

GREGORY LANE

MORELLO AVE

PASO NOGAL ROAD

CONTRA COSTA BOUELVARD

WILLOW PASS ROAD

GRAYSON ROAD

OAK PARK BOULEVARD

CONCORD AVENUE

CENTER AVENUE

CHILPANCINGO PARKWAY

GOLF CLUB ROAD

MONUMENT BOULEVARD

PUTNAM BOULEVARD

PACHECO BOULEVARD

COGGINS DRIVE

HOOKSTON ROAD PATTERSON BOULEVARD

NORSE DRIVE

ELLINWOOD DRIVE
CAMINO
VERDE

TREAT BOULEVARD

OAK ROAD

BUSKIRK AVE

MORELLO AVENUE
4 680
242
EIR Graphics\WC19-3586_1_RoadNet
Roadway Network
Figure 1
Arterial
City Boundary
Sphere of Inuence
Freeway
Collector
Railroad
Selected Local
Streets
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Source: Draft Pleasant Hill General Plan Update,
Transportation and Circulation Element

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1805 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
3 Buskirk Avenue – A north-south arterial street with traffic signals at Monument Boulevard, along the Crossroads Shopping Center, Claire Drive, Mayhew Way, and Oak Park Boulevard-Coggins Drive. Buskirk serves a variety commercial retail and residential land uses and is often utilized by through traffic traveling south from Monument Boulevard to the Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre BART Station and destinations in Walnut Creek and Concord.

Chilpancingo Parkway – An east-west arterial street that connects to Concord Avenue from the east to Morello Avenue to the west in the City of Martinez, CA. Existing traffic signal connections in Pleasant Hill include Contra Costa Boulevard and Old Quarry Road. I-680 access is provided via the interchange at Contra Costa Boulevard. Chilpancingo Parkway attracts regional traffic due to Diablo Valley College (DVC) and adjacent shopping districts. Chilpancingo Parkway also serves adjacent commercial and mediumdensity multifamily residential development. The eastern extension of this parkway is Concord Avenue, a major access route to Downtown Concord.

Contra Costa Boulevard – A north-south arterial street traversing the city parallel to Interstate 680 with freeway access at several locations. Contra Costa Boulevard continues as Pacheco Boulevard north of the North City Limit and connects to North Main Street in Walnut Creek to the south. The boulevard serves as the City’s primary thoroughfare traversing the length of the City and connecting various commercial and business developments, as well as Diablo Valley College (via Viking Drive and Golf Club Road). Contra Costa Boulevard is designated a Route of Regional Significance.

Geary Road – An east-west arterial street connecting the Lafayette/Hwy 24 area via Pleasant Hill Road to the east to Walnut Creek/I-680 along the south edge of the city. Geary Road serves regional traffic and provides a direct connection to the Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre BART Station. Geary Road serves as the City’s southern border with the City to Walnut Creek and provides direct access to various residential and commercial retail districts. Geary Road is designated a Route of Regional Significance.

Gregory Lane – An east-west arterial street connecting Pleasant Hill Road to Contra Costa Boulevard.

Geary Lane begins at its east end as an off-ramp from southbound I-680. West of Pleasant Hill Road, Gregory Lane becomes Grayson Road, a two-lane collector terminating at Reliez Valley Road. Gregory Lane serves east-west traffic through-traffic including residential, church, retail, and office land uses.

Golf Club Road – An east-west four-lane divided arterial street connecting Contra Costa Boulevard to Paso Nogal Road, narrowing to a two-lane road west to its terminus at Contra Costa Country Club. Golf Club Road provides access to residential uses, Diablo Valley College, and several retail centers.

Monument Boulevard – An east-west arterial street connecting Contra Costa Boulevard to Cowell Road and Galindo Street in downtown Concord (the city limits are located just west of Mohr Lane). Monument Boulevard provides regional access to downtown Pleasant Hill and the Crossroads Shopping Center via a single-point urban interchange on I-680.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1806 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
4 Oak Park Boulevard – An east-west arterial street connecting Pleasant Hill Road to Interstate 680, where it becomes Coggins Drive, a collector serving the Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre BART Station area.

The boulevard serves both regional traffic and local residential and commercial land uses.

Pleasant Hill Road and Alhambra Avenue – A north-south arterial street that connects Geary Road in Walnut Creek to the south to Alhambra Avenue in Martinez to the north. Pleasant Hill Road/Alhambra Avenue serves intra-city and regional travel, and provides local access to adjacent residential areas and a school. Pleasant Hill Road is designated a collector between Oak Park Boulevard and Gregory Lane.

Pleasant Hill Road/Alhambra Avenue is designated a Route of Regional Significance north of the Taylor Boulevard intersection.

Taylor Boulevard – An arterial street connecting Pleasant Hill Road to Contra Costa Boulevard, continuing as Sunvalley Boulevard east to I-680, and as Willow Pass Road east of I-680 into Concord.

Taylor Boulevard carries both local and regional traffic. Due its regional connectivity, controlled intersections, and limited driveway access, Taylor Boulevard is prone to higher speeds (45 – 55 mph).

Taylor Boulevard, its extension to I-680 via Sunvalley Boulevard as well as its extension to SR 24 via Pleasant Hill Road, is designated a Route of Regional Significance.

Collectors provide access between arterials and local roadways. They connect adjacent neighborhoods, link neighborhoods to arterial streets, and carry through-traffic in residential, industrial, and commercial areas. Primary collectors in Pleasant Hill include:

Boyd Road – An east-west collector street linking Contra Costa Boulevard with Pleasant Hill Road and serving the magnet schools of Sequoia Elementary and Middle Schools serving communities inside and outside of the City of Pleasant Hill.

Coggins Drive – An east-west collector street connecting Buskirk Avenue-Oak Road at Oak Park Boulevard to the eastern city limit, where it turns south and continues as a county roadway adjacent to the Iron Horse Regional Trail.

Cleaveland Road – A short north-south street connecting Downtown Pleasant Hill, Contra Costa Boulevard, and North Main Street.

Ellinwood Drive – A short east-west collector street connecting Contra Costa Boulevard to residential and commercial development between Contra Costa Boulevard and I-680.

Grayson Road – An east-west collector street extending west from Gregory Lane at Pleasant Hill Road to Reliez Valley Road at the entrance to Oakmont Memorial Park.

Hookston Road – A short two-lane east-west collector street connecting Buskirk Avenue south of the Crossroads Shopping Center to Bancroft Road. Hookston Road extends further east as a local roadway serving a residential area.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1807 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
5 Morello Avenue – A north-south collector street connecting Chilpancingo Parkway to Taylor Boulevard.

Morello Avenue provides access to Diablo Valley College via Viking Drive and Paso Nogal Road and extends north to Martinez from the intersection at Chilpancingo Parkway.

Norse Drive – A north-south collector street connecting Paso Nogal Road with Taylor Boulevard.

Old Quarry Road – A short north-south collector street connecting Chilpancingo Parkway and Golf Club Road, providing access to Diablo Valley College at Golf Club Road.

Paso Nogal Road – A curving collector street connecting Alhambra Avenue/Pleasant Hill Road just north of the city limits to Morello Avenue and extending from Morello Avenue at a separate intersection to Golf Club Road. Paso Nogal Road provides access to Diablo Valley College via its connection to Golf Club Road and serves direct residential access between Alhambra Avenue/Pleasant Hill Road and Morello Avenue.

Patterson Boulevard and Putnam Boulevard – A north-south collector street connecting Boyd Road to Oak Park Boulevard. Patterson Boulevard serves direct residential access as well as through trips and extends to the south into Walnut Creek as Putnam Boulevard.

Viking Drive – An east-west collector street connecting Morello Avenue to Contra Costa Boulevard, providing access to Diablo Valley College, College Park High School, Valley View Middle School, and providing direct residential access.

The remaining roadways in Pleasant Hill are considered local roadways, whose primary function is to provide direct access to residential and commercial sites.

1.1.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities

1.1.2.1 Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle planning and design typically relies on guidelines and design standards established by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000: Bikeway Planning and Design). The Highway Design Manual provides four distinct types of bikeway facilities, as described below.
• Class I Bikeways (Shared-Use Path) provide a completely separate right-of-way and are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, with vehicle and pedestrian crossflow minimized. In general, bike paths serve corridors where on-street facilities are not feasible or where sufficient right-of-way exists to allow them to be constructed. • Class II Bikeways (Bicycle Lanes) are dedicated lanes for bicyclists generally adjacent to the outer vehicle travel lanes. These lanes have special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bicycle lanes are typically at least five feet wide. Adjacent vehicle parking and vehicle/pedestrian crossflow are permitted. Buffered bike lanes are dedicated lanes for bicyclists with a designed buffer space adjacent to the vehicle travel lanes, adjacent parking, or both. This buffer space is created with chevron or diagonal striping.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1808 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
6 • Class III Bikeways (Bicycle Route) are designated by signs or pavement markings for shared use with pedestrians or motor vehicles but have no separated bike right-of-way or lane striping. Bike routes serve either to a) provide a connection to other bicycle facilities where dedicated facilities are infeasible, or b) designate preferred routes through high-demand corridors. • Class IV Bikeways (Cycle Tracks or Protected Bike Lanes) provide a right-of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel within a roadway and are protected from other vehicle traffic by physical barriers, including, but not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible vertical barriers such as raised curbs, or parked cars.

The City is preparing a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan guides the expansion and improvement of bicycle facilities citywide. Figure 2 shows the existing and recommended bicycle network described in the Draft Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The Plan is expected to be adopted in 2023. The network includes bicycle facility gap closures on key routes, bicycle facilities, and bicycle facility upgrades (e.g., from Class III to Class I, Class II, or Class IV). The recommended network would create a more complete and connected bicycle network within Pleasant Hill and connect bicyclists to high-demand destinations within and adjacent to the city.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1809 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Figure 5-1: Existing and Recommended Bikeway Network
EIR Graphics\WC19-3586_2_PHBikeMap
Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities
Figure 2
Source: Draft Pleasant Hill Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1810 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
8 1.1.2.2 Pedestrian Facilities
The City’s pedestrian facilities consist of sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signals, curb ramps, and pedestrian-scale street lighting, as well as the Contra Costa Canal Trail which runs north-south through the city and connects to the Iron Horse Regional Trail, and several other shorter off-road pathways. The Contra Costa Canal Trail and Iron Horse Regional Trail help provide access to commercial and residential areas, schools, public transportation, and other community facilities throughout Pleasant Hill and its surrounding communities.

While sidewalks are provided on many city streets, some streets have gaps in the sidewalk network. In addition, walking can be uncomfortable on higher-traffic, higher-speed streets such as Contra Costa Boulevard, Taylor Boulevard, Gregory Lane, and others. Such streets present an obstacle for pedestrians needing to cross the street, as does Interstate 680. These barriers can discourage walking as a means to get to work, school, shopping, and recreational destinations.

As noted above, the City is preparing a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that will guide the expansion and improvement of pedestrian facilities Citywide. The Plan is expected to be adopted in 2023. Figure 3 shows the existing and planned pedestrian improvements in the Draft Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1811 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Figure 6-1: Recommended Pedestrian Improvements
EIR Graphics\WC19-3586_3_RecPedImprov
Existing and Recommended Pedestrian Facilities
Figure 3
Source: Draft Pleasant Hill Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1812 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
10 1.1.3 Public Transportation
Pleasant Hill’s central location within the East Bay provides access to surrounding cities and communities, as well as to other parts of the San Francisco Bay Area. While the suburban setting lends itself to vehicular use as a preferred mode of travel, many trips can be made by public transit. The city’s transit services are described below.

BART
The Pleasant Hill BART Station is located just southeast of the city limits in the unincorporated County area, at Contra Costa Centre. The Station provides connections for all modes of travel and serves as a transit village for local and regional transit services. The BART Yellow Line serves travel between Pittsburg/ Antioch and San Francisco, including the San Francisco International Airport (as shown in Figure 4). Via connections in Oakland, riders can travel to Oakland International Airport, Richmond, Milpitas, and Dublin/Pleasanton. Contra Costa Centre is also home to several regional and local bus routes with service to San Francisco, Oakland, Sacramento, Fairfield, Vallejo, and Pleasanton/Dublin. In addition to the Contra Costa County Transit Authority’s County Connection routes, described below, regional connections are provided by Fairfield and Suisun Transit, Solano Express, and Wheels Express.

County Connection
County Connection routes traverse the city, providing access to Diablo Valley College, Pleasant Hill BART, Downtown Pleasant Hill, the Martinez Amtrak Station, and other key destinations (refer to Figure 4).

1.1.4 Aviation Facilities
The City of Pleasant Hill is served by San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and Oakland International Airport (OAK). SFO enplaned and deplaned over 16 million passengers in 2020 and facilitated takeoffs of air carriers, regional jets, general aviation propeller aircraft, commuter propeller aircraft, business jets, fixed-wing military aircraft, and both civilian and military helicopters. SFO is approximately 26 miles southwest of the city. OAK served approximately 13.4 million passengers in 2019, and serves major all-cargo carriers such as FedEx and UPS. OAK is approximately 15 miles southwest of the city.

Additionally, the Buchanan Field Airport, a small airport primarily serving charter aircrafts, private aircrafts, and student pilots, is less than 0.5 miles northeast of the General Plan area.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1813 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) 680
4 242

TAYLOR BLVD

ALHAMBRA AVE

GEARY RD

BOYD RD

PLEASANT HILL RD

GREGORY LN

MORELLO AVE

PASO NOGAL

CONTRA COSTA BLVD

WILLOW PASS RD

GRAYSON RD

OAK PARK BLVD

CONCORD AVE

MONUMENT BLVD

PUTNAM BLVD

GRAYSON RD

PASO NOGAL

OAK PARK BLVD
16 18
18 19
91X
91X
91X
20 19
98X 98X 18 28 99X
99X
98X
98X
14 9
18 14
15 14
7 11
9 18
19 28
17 16 18
16 16
18 9
98X
9 7 9
11 14
15 18
311
311
316
316
316
Pleasant Hill
BART
Diablo Valley
College
9 18
20 28
314 316
314
314
316
316
316
320
320
320
EIR Graphics\WC19-3586_4_TransitNet
Public Transit
Figure 4
0 0.25 0.5 1
County Connection Miles
BART
City Boundary
Sphere of Inuence
Highway
Roadways
Railroad
Creek Drainage
Source: Central Contra Costa Transportation Authority, September 2022

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1814 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
12 1.2 Regulatory Setting

1.2.1 Federal
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to transportation and circulation are applicable to the project.

1.2.2 State

1.2.2.1 Assembly Bill 1358
Assembly Bill 1358, also known as the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, requires cities and counties to include “Complete Street” policies in their general plans. These policies address the safe accommodation of all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, public transit vehicles and riders, children, the elderly, and the disabled. These policies can apply to new streets as well as the redesign of corridors.

The City of Pleasant Hill adopted its Complete Streets policy on January 28, 2013.

1.2.2.2 Assembly Bill 43
Assembly Bill 43, also known as Traffic Safety, allows local government agencies to reduce vehicle speeds to accommodate vulnerable users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, seniors, and wheelchair users to improve traffic safety. AB 43 takes effect in July 2024.

The City of Pleasant Hill can evaluate changes to its speed limit practices as AB 43 takes effect following adoption of the General Plan.

1.2.2.3 Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375 provides guidance regarding curbing emissions from cars and light trucks. There are four major components to SB 375. First, SB 375 requires regional greenhouse gas emission targets. These targets must be updated every 8 years in conjunction with the revision schedule of the housing and transportation elements of local general plans. Second, Metropolitan Planning Organizations are required to create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting regional targets.

Third, SB 375 requires housing elements and transportation plans to be synchronized on 8-year schedules.

Finally, Metropolitan Planning Organizations must use transportation and air emissions modeling techniques that are consistent with the guidelines prepared by the California Transportation Commission.

1.2.2.4 Senate Bill 743
Passed in 2013, California Senate Bill (SB) 743 changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in CEQA from measuring impacts to drivers, to measuring the impact of driving. The change is being made by replacing Level of Service (LOS) as a performance metric with a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) approach.

This shift in transportation impact focus is intended to better align transportation impact analysis and mitigation outcomes with the State’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, encourage infill

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1815 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
13 development, and improve public health through the development of multi-modal transportation networks. LOS or other delay metrics may still be used to evaluate the impact of projects on drivers as part of land use entitlement review and traffic impact fee programs.

In December 2018, the Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines, including the incorporation of SB 743 modifications. The Guidelines’ changes were approved by the Office of Administrative Law and as of July 1, 2020 are now in effect statewide.

To help aid lead agencies with SB 743 implementation, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) produced the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA that provides guidance about the variety of implementation questions they face with respect to shifting to a VMT metric. Key guidance from this document includes the following:
• VMT is the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impact. • OPR recommends tour-based and trip-based travel models to estimate VMT, but ultimately defers to local agencies to determine the appropriate tools.
• OPR recommends measuring VMT for residential and office projects on a “per rate” basis. • OPR recommends that a per capita or per employee VMT that is 15% below that of existing development may be a reasonable threshold. In other words, an office project that generates VMT per employee that is more than 85% of the regional VMT per employee could result in a significant impact. OPR notes that this threshold is supported by evidence that connects this level of reduction to the State’s emissions goals.
• OPR recommends that where a project replaces existing VMT-generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall decrease in VMT, the project would lead to a less-thansignificant transportation impact. If the project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds described above should apply.
• Lead agencies have the discretion to set or apply their own significance thresholds.

1.2.2.5 Assembly Bill 747 and Senate Bill 99
Assembly Bill (AB) 747 (2019) requires that the safety element be reviewed and updated to identify vehicle evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. This will be a requirement for all safety elements or updates to hazard mitigation plans completed after January of 2022.

SB 99 (2019) requires review and update of the safety element to include information to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two vehicle emergency evacuation routes. In essence, this legislation assists in identifying neighborhoods and households within a hazard area that have limited vehicle accessibility. This is intended to assist the City with identifying opportunities to improve connectivity and evacuation capacity (generally).

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1816 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
14 1.2.2.6 Caltrans
Caltrans issued the VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG) in May 2020, providing the process by which Caltrans will review and assess VMT impacts of land development projects. The TISG generally aligns with the guidance in the OPR Technical Advisory.

Caltrans also issued the Transportation Analysis Framework (TAF) in September 2020, which details methodology for calculating induced travel demand for capacity increasing transportation projects on the State Highway System. Caltrans also issued the Transportation Analysis Under CEQA (TAC) guidance in September 2020 which describes significance determinations for capacity increasing projects on the State Highway System. It is noted that the Housing Element Update does not propose any changes to the Caltrans owned and operated network.

Caltrans also issued Traffic Safety Bulletin 20-02-R1: Interim Local Development Intergovernmental Review Safety Review Practitioner Guidance in December 2020, describing the methods with which Caltrans will assess the safety impacts of projects on the Caltrans owned and operated network. This guidance states that Caltrans will provide its safety assessment to lead agencies for inclusion in environmental documents.

Finally, Caltrans has adopted procedures to oversee construction activities on and around its facilities. The Caltrans Construction Manual (Caltrans, 2020b) describes best practices for construction activities, including personnel and equipment safety requirements, temporary traffic control, signage, and other requirements aimed at reducing construction-related hazards and constructing projects safely and efficiently. Any work proposed on Caltrans facilities would be required to abide by these requirements.

1.2.3 Regional

1.2.3.1 Contra Costa County Congestion Management Program The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) is Contra Costa County’s designated Congestion Management Agency (CMA). It is responsible for implementing programs to ensure roadway vehicle levels remain manageable. Pleasant Hill serves on the Transportation Partnership and Cooperation (TRANSPAC) that includes Contra Costa County and the cities of Clayton, Concord, Martinez, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek.

As the CMA, CCTA is in charge of coordinating land use, air quality, and transportation planning among local jurisdictions. A Congestion Management Program (CMP) was created to spend the funds allocated to these projects, known as Measure J. This measure is a one-half cent Countywide sales tax used for transportation improvements within the County. The revenue must be spent on projects and programs included in the CCTA Transportation Expenditure Plan (Expenditure Plan). The Expenditure Plan designates 18% of the annual sales tax revenue as “return-to-source” funds. They City’s eligibility for these funds is contingent on compliance with the City’s Growth Management Program (GMP), reflected in the Growth Management section of the General Plan.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1817 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
15 1.2.3.2 Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan
As a member of CCTA, the City of Pleasant Hill is active in the development of the Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP), intended to carry out the following Countywide transportation goals:
• Enhance the movement of people and goods on highways and arterial roads. • Manage the impacts of growth to sustain Contra Costa’s economy and preserve its environment. • Provide and expand safe, convenient, and affordable alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle. • Maintain the transportation system.

The CTP incorporates five sub-regional Action Plans for Routes of Regional Significance (Action Plans).

This is one of the primary vehicles for implementing achieving the Measure J Growth Management Program’s goal of reducing the cumulative impacts of growth. The Action Plans also fulfill a key requirement of CCTA’s Congestion Management Program. This is a State-mandated program for evaluating the impact of land use decisions on the regional transportation system and establishing performance measures. Each Action Plan contains these components:
• Long range assumptions about future land uses based on local general plans and travel demand based on household and job growth.
• Multi-modal transportation objectives that can be measured and timed. • Specific actions to be implemented by each jurisdiction. • A process for consultation on environmental documents. • A procedure for reviewing the impacts of local General Plan amendments that could affect the transportation objectives.
• A schedule for reviewing and updating the Action Plans.

The City of Pleasant Hill is included in the TRANSPAC Central County Action Plan. The Action Plan includes both regional actions and actions for specific routes. There are 10 Routes of Regional Significance within Pleasant Hill:
• Interstate 680
• State Route 242
• State Route 4
• Alhambra Avenue
• Contra Costa Boulevard
• Geary Road
• North Main Street (Astrid Drive to Oak Park Boulevard-Coggins Drive) • Pacheco Boulevard (Muir Road to Second Avenue South)
• Pleasant Hill Road
• Taylor Boulevard

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1818 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
16 1.2.3.3 CCTA VMT Guidance for Member Agencies
The CCTA has developed guidance for member jurisdictions to use in developing their own VMT analysis methods, metrics, and thresholds of significance. The CCTA’s Growth Management Program Implementation Guide (Revised February 17, 2021), Appendix F (CCTA Recommended Methodology) describes the recommendations. A flow chart describing the recommended methodology is included in Appendix 1. The City of Pleasant Hill has chosen to follow the CCTA guidance. More detail on the VMT analysis methodology, metrics, and thresholds of significance are provided in Section 1.3.3, Methodology and Assumptions.

1.2.4 Local

1.2.4.1 Pleasant Hill General Plan
The Pleasant Hill General Plan (2003) is a comprehensive long-range general plan for the physical development of the City of Pleasant Hill. The General Plan contains the current City of Pleasant Hill Transportation and Circulation Element, which was adopted in 2003. The various elements within the General Plan include goals and policies for the physical development of the City. The proposed Project would update and replace the 2003 General Plan.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1819 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
17 2. Transportation Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
This chapter describes the analysis techniques, assumptions, and results used to identify potential impacts of the proposed plan on the transportation system. Transportation/traffic impacts are described and assessed, and mitigation measures are recommended for impacts identified as significant or potentially significant.

2.1.1 Transportation Impact Assessment Pursuant to CEQA State law has changed with respect to how transportation-related impacts are to be addressed under CEQA. Traditionally, lead agencies used level of service (LOS) to assess the significance of such impacts, with greater levels of congestion considered to be more significant than lesser levels. Mitigation measures typically took the form of capacity-increasing improvements, which in turn could result in additional environmental impacts (e.g., to biological and cultural resources). Depending on circumstances, and a lead agency’s tolerance for congestion (e.g., as reflected in its general plan), LOS D, E, or F often represented significant environmental effects. In 2013, however, the California Legislature passed legislation with the intention of ultimately doing away with LOS in most instances as a basis for transportation impact analysis under CEQA. Enacted as part of Senate Bill 743 (2013), PRC Section 21099, Subdivision (b)(1), directed the Governor’s Office of Policy and Research (OPR) to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency for certification and adoption proposed CEQA Guidelines addressing “criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas. Those criteria shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multi-modal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. In developing the criteria, [OPR] shall recommend potential metrics to measure transportation impacts that may include, but are not limited to, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated. The office may also establish criteria for models used to analyze transportation impacts to ensure the models are accurate, reliable, and consistent with the intent of this section.” CEQA Guidelines Section 21099(b)(2) further provides that “[u]pon certification of the guidelines by the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency pursuant to this section, automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to [CEQA], except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” (Italics added.)
Pursuant to SB 743, the Natural Resources Agency promulgated CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 in late 2018. It became effective in early 2019. Subdivision (a) of that section provides that “[g]enerally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For the purposes of this section, ‘vehicle miles traveled’ refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1820 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
18 Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel.

Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) [regarding roadway capacity], a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.”

2.1.2 Significance Criteria and Thresholds
The significance criteria used to evaluate the plan transportation impacts are based on State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Transportation section), as well as VMT thresholds of significance recommended by the CCTA.

The following describes the significance criteria used to identify transportation impacts associated with implementation of the plan. A significant impact would occur if implementation of the plan would:

1. Conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities;

2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b);

3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves of dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment); or

4. Result in inadequate emergency vehicle access.

Significance Criterion 1 above pertains to consistency with circulation programs, plans, ordinances, and policies. To determine significance under Criterion 1, the following specific thresholds of significance are applied.

The plan would result in a significant impact related to the roadway circulation system if the 2040 General Plan would:

1. Disrupts existing roadways;

2. Interfere with planned roadway facilities; or

3. Conflict with applicable roadway plans, guidelines, policies, or standards.

The plan would result in a significant impact related to the transit circulation system if the 2040 General Plan would:

1. Disrupt existing transit services or facilities;

2. Conflict with an existing or planned transit facility; or

3. Conflict with transit policies adopted by the City of Pleasant Hill or the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

The plan would result in a significant impact related to the bicycle circulation system if the 2040 General Plan would:

1. Disrupt existing bicycle facilities;

2. Interfere with planned bicycle facilities; or,

3. Conflict with applicable bicycle system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1821 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
19 The plan would result in a significant impact related to the pedestrian circulation system if the 2040 General Plan would:

1. Disrupt existing pedestrian facilities; or

2. Interfere with planned pedestrian facilities; or

3. Conflict with applicable pedestrian system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards.

Significance Criterion 2 pertains to VMT. To determine significance under Criterion 2, the following specific thresholds of significance are applied.

The plan would result in a significant impact if the 2040 General Plan would:

1. Result in Citywide home-based VMT1 per resident that is higher than 85% of the Countywide average home-based VMT per resident;

2. Result in Citywide home-work VMT2 per employee that is higher than 85% of the Countywide average home-work VMT per employee; or

3. Increases the 2040 countywide boundary VMT per service population. (refer to the following section for more information related to VMT impact methodology and assumptions).

Significance Criterion 3 pertains to the creation of transportation hazards. To determine significance under Criterion 3, the following specific thresholds of significance are applied.

The impact would be significant if the Plan resulted in transportation facilities that do not conform to applicable City and industry design standards for roadways, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian facilities.

Significance Criterion 4 pertains to the adequacy of emergency access. To determine significance under Criterion 4, the following specific thresholds of significance are applied.

This impact would be significant if roadway geometric design features were not designed to City standards and standard engineering practices were not followed, thereby resulting in obstacles to emergency responders.

2.1.3 VMT Impact Methodology and Assumptions
The VMT analysis methodology utilizes the procedures described in the CCTA’s Growth Management Program Implementation Guide (Revised February 17, 2021), Appendix F. The procedures are summarized below.
1 Home-based VMT is VMT generated by trips to and from the home, made by residents, deliveries, etc., and excludes trips made by residents between non-home locations (such as trips between their workplace and other destinations during the day).
2 Home-work VMT is VMT generated by employee trips between the home and the workplace, and excludes other workplace trips such as visitors, vendors, and deliveries.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1822 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
20 2.1.3.1 Project Screening
There are five screening criteria that can be applied to screen projects out of conducting project-level VMT analysis.

1. CEQA Exemption. Any project that is exempt from CEQA is not required to conduct a VMT analysis.

2. Small Projects. Small projects can be presumed to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact.

Small projects are defined as having 10,000 square feet or less of non-residential space or 20 residential units or less, or otherwise generating less than 836 VMT per day.

3. Local-Serving Uses. Projects that consist of Local-Serving Uses can generally be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary, since these types of projects will primarily draw users and customers from a relatively small geographic area that will lead to short-distance trips and trips that are linked to other destinations.

4. Projects Located in Transit Priority Areas (TPAs). Projects located within a TPA can be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This exemption would not apply if the project:
◦ Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
◦ Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees than required by the lead agency (if the agency allows but does not require the project to supply a certain amount of parking);
◦ Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) (as determined by the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)); or ◦ Results in a net reduction in multi-family housing units.

5. Projects Located in Low VMT Areas. Residential and employment-generating projects located within a low VMT-generating area can be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

For residential projects, a low VMT area is defined as an area with existing home-based VMT per resident that is 85% or less of the existing Countywide average.

As will be discussed below under Impact 4.14-2, the Project does not meet these five potential screening approaches and thus requires a full VMT assessment.

2.1.3.2 Projects Requiring VMT Analysis
A project not excluded from VMT analysis through the screening process described above is subject to a VMT analysis to determine if it has a significant VMT impact. The analysis scenarios and significance assessment are described below.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1823 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
21 2.1.3.2.1 Analysis Scenarios and Significance Test
The following scenarios are addressed in the VMT analysis. Note that, while the CCTA guidance recommends that VMT impacts be evaluated against baseline (existing) conditions, for this analysis the home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee of the Project is evaluated under future (2040) conditions, because the Project is build-out of the city under the General Plan. In addition to the comparison of the Project’s 2040 home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee to the baseline metrics, a cumulative assessment of the project’s effect on total countywide VMT rates (boundary VMT) is presented.
• Baseline (2022) Conditions: The baseline (2022) CCTA model is used to determine the baseline home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee for all traffic analysis zones (TAZs) within the city limits, as well as to determine the countywide average home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee, and the 85% values of these metrics. • 2040 No Project Conditions: The Year 2040 CCTA model is adjusted to reflect build-out of the city under the existing General Plan, and is used to determine the 2040 No Project home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee for the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) comprising the city limits.
• 2040 Plus Project Conditions: The Year 2040 CCTA model is adjusted to reflect build-out of the city under the proposed General Plan Update, and is used to determine the 2040 No Project homebased VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee for the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) comprising the city limits.
• Impact Significance Assessment: The 2040 Plus Project home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee for the city of Pleasant Hill (all TAZs) is compared to the 2022 countywide home-based VMT per resident and home-work VMT per employee. If the citywide values are higher than 85% of the countywide average values, the impact is significant. • Cumulative Analysis and Significance Assessment (Project’s Effect on Total Countywide VMT): The total countywide VMT per service population (defined as VMT generated by all trip types on all roadways within the county divided by all residents and employees) is compared for the 2040 Plus Project condition against the 2040 No Project condition. If the Project causes total countywide VMT per service population to increase, this would constitute a significant impact.

2.1.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Criterion 1: Would implementation of the plan conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Impact 1a: Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the transit system. (Less than Significant Impact) This impact would be significant if the Project would disrupt existing transit services or facilities, conflict with an existing or planned transit facility, or conflicts with transit policies adopted by the City of Pleasant Hill or the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1824 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
22 Development under the General Plan Update would not obstruct existing transit services or facilities, nor would it conflict with existing or planned facilities. All new development would be subject to City discretionary review, allowing the City to ensure that project designs would not interfere with transit operations. Buildout of the proposed General Plan Update would increase the number of potential transit users on the various transit systems serving the city. Increased users would result in a correlated increase in demand for transit. Additionally, roadway traffic congestion caused from population and employment growth in the city facilitated by the General Plan Update could affect transit corridors by increasing travel times and decreasing headway reliability for transit vehicles.

The Transportation and Circulation Element of the General Plan Update contains the following goals and policies that would support reducing traffic congestion and improving transit connectivity:

Goal TC-1: Establish and maintain a safe and efficient circulation system that emphasizes the use of existing arterial and collector roadways, paths, and bike lanes.

TC-1.2 Multi-Modal Travel Options
Develop a connected network of vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities that provide continuous, safe, and comfortable travel for users of all ages, abilities, and transportation modes. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 2A] TC-1.3 Community Input on Complete Streets
When planning and designing for complete streets, receive input from groups and individuals representing the various types of users of City streets. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 2B]
TC-1.4 Community Input on Roadway Improvements
Support the sponsoring of forums to obtain citizen input to develop roadway improvements aimed at improving traffic circulation, reduce traffic speeding, and maximizing person throughput. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 3.1, modified]
Goal TC-4: Reduce congestion and vehicle trips through land use planning.

TC-4.1 Transportation Mode Mix
Plan for appropriate mix of transportation modes and the infrastructure to support these modes to meet community needs. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 5A] TC-4.2 Develop Thoroughfares
Develop and improve thoroughfares based on existing and proposed land use patterns and projected demand. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 5B] TC-4.4 Infill Development
Support infill and redevelopment in existing urban areas and around key transit facilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Growth Management Policy 1B]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1825 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
23 TC-4.5 Correlation Between Land Use and Transportation Support land use patterns that make more efficient use of the transportation system, such as locating development near transit routes and high quality bicycle/pedestrian facilities, minimizing new driveways, consolidating parking, and other best practice urban design measures. [Source: Existing General Plan, Growth Management Goal 1, Edited] Goal TC-5: Support a vibrant, walkable environment that encourages alternative (non-driving_ modes of transportation.

TC-5.1 Evaluate Multi-Modal Facility Needs
Evaluate the needs of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and/or access for new development as part of the review process, and require new development to incorporate transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access where feasible and appropriate, consistent with the Circulation Element and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (when adopted). [Source:

Existing General Plan, Growth Management Program 3.3]
Goal TC-8: Encourage the development of a comprehensive and integrated transportation network with infrastructure and design features that allow safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, seniors, youth, and families.

TC-8.1 Complete Streets Principles
Apply complete streets principles when building new, or rehabilitating existing, roadways, consider the following design elements:
♦ Sidewalks and curbs as a standard design principle.
♦ Bicycle lanes and/or shared lanes as a standard design principle. ♦ Transit accessibility as a standard design principle. ♦ Shade trees and planting strips as a standard design principle along roadways [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 2.3, modified] TC-8.2 Review for Complete Streets
Review street reconstruction, new development, and utility projects to incorporate complete street elements when feasible, including trails, bus stop enhancements, and bicycle/pedestrian facilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 2.4, modified]
Goal TC-13: Reduce congestion and vehicle trips through non-automobile transportation.

TC-13.1 Bus and Rail Services
Coordinate with local transit providers (i.e., bus, paratransit, and rail service) to provide expanded schedules and services that meet the needs of Pleasant Hill residents. [Source:

Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 6A, modified]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1826 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
24 TC-13.2 Innovative Transportation Technologies
Work with transit providers, employers, schools, and developers to encourage innovative technologies that promote more effective and expanded use of transit and facilitate other innovations to serve first and last mile travel, such as mobility hubs and micro-mobility (e-scooters, e-bikes). [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 4.7 and

6.7, modified]
TC-13.3 Support County Connection Improvements
Support County Connection to improve all types of accessibility and comfort for their facilities and to incorporate intermodal facilities where feasible. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 6.6, modified]
TC-13.4 Transit for Commuters and Special Needs Populations Work with transit providers and other regional TDM entities to promote and incentivize use of transit for commuters, seniors, students, and persons with disabilities. [Source:

Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 6.9, modified] TC-13.5 Senior Van Service
Maintain the City's Senior Van Service for residents over the age of 55, subject to the availability of funding. [Source: Existing General Plan, Growth Management Program 3.4] The General Plan Update goals and policies listed above encourage an increase in transit ridership, decreased dependence on motor vehicles, and reduce transit delays. While the proposed Project could add peak hour transit riders, implementation of the proposed project would not disrupt existing or interfere with planned transit services or facilities.

The Contra Costa Transportation Authority Countywide Transportation Plan (2017) contains goals and policies to manage the county’s transportation system, including several policies relating to the preservation and enhancement of transit service, in partnership with local jurisdictions, as the county grows. These goals and policies are consistent with the General Plan Update goals and policies and will result in coordinated planning for the expansion of transit service to meet demand as the City of Pleasant Hill grows under the General Plan Update.

Goal 1: Support the efficient, safe, and reliable movement of people and goods using all available travel modes.

Policy 1.1: Efficiency. Increase the efficiency of highways and arterial roads through capital investments, operational enhancements, and use of technology Policy 1.2: Partnerships. Engage in partnerships with jurisdictions, stakeholders, and other agencies to identify and implement strategies for managing congestion and increasing multi-modal mobility.

Policy 1.4: Street and Roadway Improvements. Improve the highway and arterial system to influence the location and nature of anticipated growth in accordance with the

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1827 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
25 General Plans of local jurisdictions and consistent with Contra Costa Transportation Authority adopted Countywide Transportation Plan.

Goal 2: Manage growth to sustain Contra Costa’s economy, preserve its environment and support its communities.

Policy 2.1: Cooperative Planning. Continue to require cooperative transportation and land use planning among Contra Costa County, cities, towns, and transportation agencies.

Goal 3: Expand safe, convenient, and affordable alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.

Policy 3.1: Transit Service Expansion. Help fund the expansion of existing transit services and regional express lanes, and maintenance of existing operations, including BART, bus transit, school buses, and paratransit.

Policy 3.2: Transit Service Coordination. Link transit investments to increased coordination and integration of public transit services, and improved connections between travel modes.

Policy 3.3: Complete Streets. Require local jurisdictions to incorporate policies and standards for “complete streets” that support transit, bicycle and pedestrian access in new developments, infill development areas (“Priority Development Areas”), and transit priority areas.

Policy 3.5: Alternate Modes. Promote the formation of more carpools and vanpools, and greater use of transit, bicycling, and walking.

Goal 4: Maintain the transportation system.

Policy 4.1: Stable Funding Sources. Advocate for stable sources of funds for transit operations and other programs that support the transportation system.

Policy 4.2: Maintenance. Require and fund programs for effective preventive maintenance and rehabilitation of the transportation system (“deferred maintenance”).

Policy 4.3: Long-Term Needs. Secure funding that will maintain the long-term health of all components of the transportation system.

Based on the discussion above, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

Impact 1b: Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the roadway system. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation).

This impact would be significant if the Project would disrupt existing or planned roadway facilities or conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy regarding the roadway system.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1828 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
26 The 2040 General Plan includes modifications to existing street facilities to create a more pedestrianoriented and bicycle-oriented street network. These modifications could cause existing and future local and regional traffic to circulate differently. The expected influence on existing and future traffic would be minimal because roadway modifications would conform to State and local standards and generally be implemented to improve circulation. Overall, the General Plan Update’s proposed bicycle and pedestrian improvements would not conflict with existing or planned roadway facilities because the proposed street changes are additions of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and do not specifically propose any reduction in vehicle lanes.

The Transportation and Circulation Element of the General Plan Update contains the following goals and policies that guide development and maintenance of the city’s roadway network:

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1829 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
27 Goal TC-1: Establish and maintain a safe and efficient circulation system that emphasizes the use of existing arterial and collector roadways, paths, and bike lanes.

Policy TC-1.1 Rights-of-Way. Maintain existing circulation system rights-of-way, except as necessary to address localized congestion areas.

Goal TC-2: Improve traffic circulation along the city roadway network.

Policy TC-2.3 LOS Standards and Conditions of Approval. Approve new development which at least meets or is mitigated to meet adopted LOS standards as documented in the City Findings of Consistency.

Policy TC-2.4 Traffic Impact Study. Require traffic impact studies (including VMT and LOS analysis) as part of the application review process for development projects.

Policy TC-2.5 Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Require robust transportation demand management with all new private development that requires establishment of incentives and programs to reduce traffic congestion including annual reporting to ensure transportation demand management goals for a project are being met and to correct transportation demand management practices.

Goal TC-3: Encourage slower vehicle speeds and discourage cut-through traffic along City roadways, especially within residential neighborhoods and along freeway bypass routes.

Policy TC-3.1 Residential Streets. Prioritize traffic calming improvements and enforcement efforts along residential roadways that have recurring cut-through traffic or excessive speeding.

Policy TC-3.2 Arterial and Collector Streets. Minimize opportunities for regionally generated cutthrough vehicle travel in the city as part of new roadway projects or projects within public roadways.

Policy TC-3.3 Vehicle Traffic Calming Devices. Consider traffic calming devices such as lane narrowing, widening medians, neighborhood traffic circles, roundabouts, and landscaping to discourage cut-through vehicle traffic.

Policy TC-3.4 Alternative Methods to Prevent Cut-Through Vehicle Traffic. Consider the use of alternative street surfacing materials, traffic diverters, special designs, and stop signs to prevent cut-through traffic on residential streets.

Policy TC-3.5 Monument Triangle Congestion. Support the reconfiguration of the Monument Triangle circulation network and to improve vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle safety while reducing congestion anticipated from future development.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1830 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
28 Policy TC-3.6 School Area Congestion. Work with the Mount Diablo Unified School District, private schools, and Diablo Valley College to address traffic speeds and congestion near schools and on key access routes.

Goal TC-4: Reduce congestion and vehicle trips through land use planning.

Goal TC-7: Focus on integrated regional approaches to the use of inter-jurisdictional trails such as the Contra Costa Canal Trail and the Iron Horse Trail for all trip purposes.

Policy TC-7.1 Multi-Jurisdictional Transportation Planning. Participate in multi-jurisdictional transportation planning through TRANSPAC and CCTA activities to ensure all City planning efforts, projects, and developments comply with regional requirements and standards.

Goal TC-8: Encourage the development of a comprehensive and integrated transportation network with infrastructure and design features that allow safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, seniors, youth, and families.

Policy TC-8.5 Reduce Vehicle Speeds. Support the reduction of vehicle speeds using engineering and design techniques, community education, and evaluation and planning strategies rather than relying solely on enforcement.

Policy TC-8.8 New Development Neighborhood Traffic Impacts. Require developer participation in the cost of installation of traffic calming measures to reduce neighborhood traffic impacts through fee payments or direct contribution as a condition of approval, if applicable.

Policy TC-8.11 Traffic Safety Corridors. Identify Traffic Safety Corridors along Suggested Routes to School and protected residential neighborhoods as allowed through California Assembly Bill 43 – Traffic Safety to establish lower speed streets to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.

Goal TC-14: Provide for the safe and efficient movement of goods to support commerce, industry, and the community.

Policy TC-14.1 Minimize Truck Conflicts. Minimize potential conflicts between trucks and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel on streets designated as truck routes.

Policy TC-14.2 Minimize Truck Loading and Unloading Conflicts. Minimize potential conflicts between truck loading and unloading and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel.

Policy TC-14.4 Truck Route Network. Develop a signage program that identifies truck routes.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1831 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
29 Implementation of the above 2040 General Plan policies would ensure consistency with circulation system policies related to roadway facilities.

It is noted that buildout of the proposed General Plan Update land use plan – an approximately 100% increase in residential units and a 50% increase in non-residential uses – would increase the vehicle travel demand on the city’s roadway network. Increased vehicle travel demand may result in increased congestion, because no roadway widenings are proposed in the General Plan Update. The travel demand forecasting performed for the General Plan Update indicates that certain segments of the following roadways would exceed the daily vehicle capacities, as defined in the Contra Costa Countywide Travel Demand Model:
• Contra Cost Boulevard, Beth Drive to Sunvalley Boulevard • Ellinwood Drive, East of Contra Costa Boulevard
• Buskirk Avenue, Monument Boulevard to Hookston Road
• Oak Park Boulevard, Hook Avenue to Putnam Boulevard
It is important to note that the forecasting encompasses full build-out of all parcels to their maximum capacity, as defined by the General Plan Update team, and represents growth over a much longer period than the 18 years represented in the travel demand model (2022 to 2040). Therefore, these over-capacity conditions may not materialize by 2040.

Growth associated with implementation of the 2040 General Plan could interfere with the operation of existing roadway facilities or conflict with planned roadway facilities; however, implementation of the aforementioned roadway facility policies would minimize such potential conflicts. Therefore, with respect to conflicts with circulation system policies related to roadway facilities, operational impacts of the 2040 General Plan would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

Impact 1c: Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the bicycle system. (Less than Significant Impact) The project would create a significant impact related to the bicycle system if the General Plan Update:

1. Disrupts existing bicycle facilities;

2. Interferes with planned bicycle facilities; or,

3. Conflicts with applicable bicycle system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards.

Growth in residential and non-residential uses under the General Plan Update could result in more bicycle use on existing facilities. The General Plan Update includes complete streets policies, new bicycle facilities, and transportation and circulation goals and policies to accommodate increased bicycle demands generated by new development. This network would accommodate bicycle demand generated by the land development. Examples of goals and policies in the General Plan Update Transportation and

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1832 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
30 Circulation Element that would encourage bicycle transportation modes while also ensuring bicycle facilities are adequate include the following:

Goal TC-11: Increase the number of bicycle and pedestrian trips by users of all ages and abilities.

TC-11.1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Network
Support a network of safe and comfortable bikeway and pedestrian facilities connecting neighborhoods and destinations in Pleasant Hill and adjacent jurisdictions. [Source: 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Policy 1.1, modified] TC-11.2 Street Design
Require street cross-sections to accommodate bicyclists, micro-mobility users, and pedestrians. [Source: 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Policy 1.2, modified] TC-11.3 Protected Bicycle Facilities
Consider incorporating protected bicycle and pedestrian facilities in higher density land use areas and along major transportation corridors to the greatest extent feasible. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 5.1, modified] Goal TC-12: Strive to eliminate all fatal and serious injury bicycle and pedestrian related crashes.

TC-12.1 Collision Database
Create a traffic count data and collision database and work with applicable City departments and law enforcement to map collision data for identifying problem areas. [Source: 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Policy 2.1] TC-12.2 Design Standards
Support design upgrades to bicycle and pedestrian facilities to increase connectivity and safety citywide. [Source: New Policy]
TC-12.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Education
Support bicycle and pedestrian safety education in all Pleasant Hill schools. Continue to support Safe Routes to Schools programs to address pedestrian and bicycle safety. [Source: 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Policy 2.3] TC-12.4 Safe Routes to School (SR2S)
Support Safe Routes to School infrastructure and education & encouragement programs to address and enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety. Develop Suggested Route to School maps for Pleasant Hill schools to help prioritize infrastructure improvements along routes supporting student commutes. [Source: New Policy] TC-12.5 Technology Safety Enhancements
Identify and deploy technology solutions to support bicycle and pedestrian safety through the City including passive detection systems at traffic signals and trail crossings. [Source: New Policy]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1833 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
31 TC-12.6 Bike Route Connectivity
Develop and sign a network of bicycle routes that provide connectivity between homes, job centers, schools and other frequently visited destinations. [Source: New Policy] TC-12.7 Emphasis on Walking and Biking
Encourage more people to walk and bicycle for a variety of purposes.

TC-12.8 Bicycle Parking
Support the expansion of the bicycle parking network in Pleasant Hill. [Source: 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Goal 3]
TC-12.9 Supportive Infrastructure
Encourage the implementation of supportive infrastructure and programs.

TC-12.10 Safe Intersections for Bicycles
Ensure adequate crossing times and detection for bicycle users at signalized intersections.

TC-12.11 Commute Information
Promote 511 Contra Costa alternative commute mode materials to encourage reduced reliance on vehicular use.

TC-12.12 Bike to Work Day
Promote and support a Bike to Work Day.

TC-12.13 Speed Limit Modifications
Using future accommodations provided through AB 43 – Traffic Safety, re-survey speed limits in the City to identify speed limit reduction opportunities that focus on traffic safety for vulnerable roadway users.

The General Plan Update would encourage bicycling by improving bicycle connectivity with a comprehensive community-wide network of on-street and off-street bicycle facilities as defined in the City of Pleasant Hill adopted 2023 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Implementation of the General Plan Update would not interfere with existing bicycle facilities or conflict with planned bicycle facilities or adopted bicycle system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards. Furthermore, implementation of the General Plan Update would create new bicycle facilities consistent with the City of Pleasant Hill 2023 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which would have a beneficial effect on bicycle circulation and access.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1834 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
32 Impact 1d: Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the pedestrian system. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project would create a significant impact related to the pedestrian system if the General Plan Update:

1. Disrupts existing pedestrian facilities; or

2. Interferes with planned pedestrian facilities; or

3. Conflicts with applicable pedestrian system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards.

Growth in residential and non-residential uses under the General Plan Update could result in more use and demand on existing pedestrian facilities. The General Plan Update includes complete streets policies, new pedestrian facilities, and transportation and circulation goals and policies to accommodate increased pedestrian demands generated by the development envisioned in the General Plan Update. The General Plan Update would encourage walking by improving pedestrian facilities and connectivity with a safe and continuous pedestrian network to shorten walking distances and improve pedestrian connections to popular local destinations. Examples of goals and policies in the General Plan Update Transportation and Circulation Element that would encourage walking trips and ensure pedestrian facilities are adequate include the following:

Goal TC-9: Prioritize a safe and connected pedestrian network for users of all ages and abilities.

TC-9.1 Pedestrian Safety
Maintain and upgrade the City’s pedestrian system by installing or upgrading sidewalks, warning devices, crosswalks, and other pedestrian aids where appropriate, including particular consideration for the needs of users of all ages and abilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 8A, modified]
TC-9.2 Pedestrian Connections
Require new development to use best practices in providing pedestrian connections between sites and existing and planned pedestrian facilities, including those identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and other relevant plans and documents. [Source:

New Policy]
TC-9.3 Enhance Pedestrian Crossings
Enhance pedestrian crossings on all arterial and collector roadways. [Source: New Policy] TC-9.4 Sidewalk Maintenance
Maintain existing sidewalk to meet ADA requirements, including removal or relocation of objects obstructing pedestrian path and installation of wider or detached sidewalks with a buffer separation from vehicular traffic, where feasible. [Source: New Policy]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1835 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
33 TC-9.5 Sidewalk Guidelines and Standards
Establish sidewalk standards and guidelines for enhancing existing sidewalk and installation of new sidewalks. [Source: New Policy]
TC-9.6 Planning for Pedestrian Improvements
Ensure all planning processes, such as PUD Concept Plans, master plans and specific plans, identify areas where pedestrian improvements can be made, such as new connections, increased sidewalk width, improved crosswalks, improved lighting, and new street furniture. [Source: New Policy]
TC-9.7 Enhance Street Lighting
Enhance street lighting to provide for better pedestrian safety. [Source: New Policy] TC-9.8 Sidewalk Improvements
Improve sidewalks to facilitate access by users of all ages and abilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 9A]
TC-9.9 Sidewalk Gap Closure Plan
Create a sidewalk gap closure plan that identifies high-priority sidewalk throughout the city and establishes an implementation plan for eliminating the gaps. [Source: New Policy] Goal TC-10: Provide well-designed and well-maintained off-street paths and trails.

TC-10.1 Prioritize Linkages
Design and maintain a pedestrian system that provides connections between trails and access to roadways and parking. [Source: New Policy]
TC-10.2 Safe and Interconnected Trails
Work with other responsible/owner agencies to ensure the trails system is designed to be safe and interconnected, incorporating on-street connections where needed, designed for pedestrians and/or bicyclists, and consistent with other relevant plans. [Source:

New Policy]
TC-10.3 Safe Trail Crossings
Provide safe trail crossings at surface streets for all non-motorized users. This requires the installation of signs, striping, pavement markings, and actuated traffic control devices, where applicable. [Source: New Policy]
TC-10.4 New Trails
Coordinate with East Bay Municipal Utility District and other agencies to explore new trail opportunities to provide connections to parts of the city without off-road bicycle and pedestrian connections. [Source: New Policy]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1836 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
34 See also Goal TC-11; Policies TC-11.1, 11.2 and 11.3; Goal TC-12; and Policies TC-12.1, 12, 2, 12.3, 12.4,

12.5, 12.7, and 12.9, listed under Impact 1c above.

Implementation of the General Plan Update would not interfere with existing pedestrian facilities or conflict with planned pedestrian facilities or adopted pedestrian system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards. Furthermore, implementation of the General Plan Update would create new pedestrian facilities and have a beneficial effect on pedestrian circulation and access consistent with the City of Pleasant Hill Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

Criterion 2: Would the plan conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Impact 2: Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would generate home-based VMT per resident that is less than 85% of the Countywide average home-based VMT per resident, but would generate home-work VMT per employee that is higher than 85% of the Countywide home-work VMT per employee. (Significant and Unavoidable Impact with Mitigation) Significance threshold 2 pertains to VMT. For the purposes of this evaluation, this impact would be significant if the implementation of the Project would result in citywide home-based VMT per resident that is higher than 85% of the countywide average home-based VMT per resident; or if the Project would result in citywide home-work VMT per employee that is higher than 85% of the countywide average home-work VMT per employee In addition, the impact would be significant if the 2040 countywide boundary VMT per service population increases with the Project.

See Section 2.1.3 for a description of the VMT impact analysis methodology.

2.1.4.1 Screening Analysis
The potential to screen the Project from a full VMT analysis was considered, as described below. The five key screening criteria are addressed. For the reasons given, it was determined that a full VMT analysis should be conducted for the Project.

1. CEQA Exemption. The project is not otherwise exempt from CEQA, so this criterion does not apply.

2. Small Projects. While it is possible that certain housing developments built under the HEU would be 20 or fewer units, this screening test would need to be applied as a part of individual project review, and does not apply to the HEU program as a whole.

3. Local-Serving Uses. This screening criteria is intended to apply to commercial uses, and is not relevant to residential project types.

4. Projects Located in Transit Priority Areas (TPAs). The half-mile surrounding the Pleasant Hill BART Station qualifies as a TPA. Individual development projects constructed in the future that are

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1837 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
35 located within this area may screen out from a full VMT impact analysis. However, such screening assessment is not appropriate within the Draft Pleasant Hill General Plan Update CEQA analysis.

Therefore, this screening criteria does not apply to the evaluation of the Project.

5. Projects Located in Low VMT Areas. Screening based on location within a low-VMT area would be based on the VMT maps prepared by CCTA at the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level, using the Contra Costa Countywide Travel Demand Model results. Certain TAZs may meet the criteria of low-VMT generating characteristics, and development projects within these TAZs could be presumed to have a less than significant impact with respect to VMT. Such a screening assessment is not appropriate within the Draft Pleasant Hill General Plan Update CEQA analysis.

Therefore, this screening criteria does not apply to the evaluation of the Project.

2.1.4.2 VMT Analysis

2.1.4.2.1 Modelling Procedure
The Contra Costa Countywide Travel Demand Model (CCTA Model) was used to generate VMT estimates for the Project. The CCTA Model allows analysts to forecast regional travel behavior as a function of local land use development decisions, transportation network infrastructure planning, and land use and network policies. The CCTA Model reflects data included in Plan Bay Area 2040, the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) that was recently replaced with adoption of Plan Bay Area 2050 by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). CCTA has prepared a memorandum documenting the CCTA Model’s consistency with Plan Bay Area 2040, and the model is currently the best available tool for analysis of VMT impacts.

Residential projects are evaluated based on the home-based VMT per resident VMT metric. Home-based VMT is defined as all home-based automobile vehicle trips traced back to the residence of the trip-maker.

Non-home-based trips are excluded. This VMT includes the entire length of the trip. This home-based VMT is then divided by the number of residents to calculate home-based VMT per resident.

Non-residential uses are evaluated based on the home-work VMT per employee metric. Home-work VMT is defined as the employee commute trip to and from work, and excludes mid-day trips, vendor and delivery trips, and visitor trips to the work site.

The VMT calculations are done in the CCTA Model via the production and attraction trip matrices to be able to attribute automobile vehicle trips to the residence of the trip-maker or the work site of the trip maker, respectively. The calculations include the entire trip length, including the portion that leaves the travel model area (the nine-county Bay Area). VMT for trips that leave the travel model area is adjusted to account for the part of the trip that occurs outside of the travel model area.

2.1.4.2.2 Land Use and Analysis Scenarios
Table 1 shows the citywide build-out land uses under the Existing General Plan and the Draft General Plan Update. The baseline (2022) city of Pleasant Hill land uses in the CCTA Model are also shown for reference. A detailed table showing more land use detail is included in Appendix 2. The build-out

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1838 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
36 projections were prepared by the 2040 General Plan preparer, Mintier Harnish, and represent full development of all parcels at the densities allowed under each scenario. As such, they likely represent a longer-range development scenario than is expected to occur between the baseline year (2022) and the forecast year (2040). However, the direction from City staff was to use the full build-out land use values for the 2040 VMT impact assessment. It is noted that the remainder of the 2040 CCTA Model represents 2040 land use growth consistent with the Association of Bay Area Governments forecasts.

Table 1: City of Pleasant Hill Land Use Summary
Scenario Total Housing Units Total Employees
CCTA 2022 Baseline Model 15,511 16,883
Existing General Plan Build-Out 30,755 39,282
Draft General Plan Update Build-Out 35,341 40,176
Growth: Existing General Plan Build-Out –
CCTA Model 2022 15,244 22,399
Growth: Draft General Plan Update BuildOut – CCTA Model 2022 19,830 23,293 Source: CCTA Travel Demand Model (2022 data); Mintier Harnish (Build-out data); August 2022.

2.1.4.3 VMT Results

2.1.4.3.1 2040 General Plan Analysis
The Contra Costa Countywide Travel Demand Model was adjusted to reflect the relevant land use growth for the 2040 No Project and 2040 With Project cases, as described above. Table 2 presents the VMT results for the home-based VMT per resident, and Table 3 presents the results for the home-work VMT per employee.

Table 2: Citywide Home-Based VMT Summary
Scenario Home-Based
VMT Residents
Home-Based
VMT Per
Resident
County Average HomeBased VMT per Resident
2022 Baseline 441,405 34,193 12.9 17.2
Threshold1--- --- --- 14.6
2040 With Existing General Plan BuildOut 646,563 58,629 11.0 15.9 2040 With General Plan Update BuildOut 739,984 70,397 10.5 15.9 Does Project meet Threshold? --- --- Yes ---

1. 85% of 2022 Baseline Countywide Average
Source: CCTA Travel Demand Model; Fehr & Peers, October 2022.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1839 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
37 Table 3: Citywide Home-Work VMT Summary
Scenario Home-Work
VMT Employees
Home-Work
VMT per
Employee
County Average
Home-Work
VMT per
Employee
2022 Baseline 324,168 22,742 14.3 15.0
Threshold1--- --- --- 12.7
2040 With Existing General Plan Build-Out 506,612 36,127 14.0 15.1 2040 With General Plan Update Build-Out 519,951 37,069 14.0 15.0 Does Project meet Threshold? --- --- No ---

1. 85% of 2022 Baseline Countywide Average
Source: CCTA Travel Demand Model; Fehr & Peers, October 2022.

The analysis indicates that:
• The City of Pleasant Hill VMT per resident of 12.9 miles-per-resident is substantially lower than the Countywide average VMT per resident of 17.2 miles-per-resident in the 2022 baseline and is projected to be substantially lower than the Countywide average VMT per resident in 2040 for both the Existing General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update Build-Outs. • The City of Pleasant Hill Home-Work VMT per employee of 14.3 miles-per-resident is slightly lower than the Countywide average Home-Work VMT per employee of 15.0 miles-per-resident in the 2022 baseline and is projected to be slightly lower than the Countywide average VMT per resident in 2040 for both the Existing General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update Build-Outs. • Home-Based VMT rates in the County as a whole, and in the City of Pleasant Hill, are projected to decline between 2022 and 2040. Home-Work VMT rates in the County and in the city of Pleasant Hill are projected to stay relatively similar between 2022 and 2040. • The Home-Based VMT rates in the City of Pleasant Hill are projected to be less than 85% of the baseline Countywide average for both the Existing General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update Build-Outs. Thus the General Plan Update would have a less than significant impact on Home-based VMT per resident.
• The Home-Work VMT rates in the City of Pleasant Hill are projected to be higher than 85% of the baseline Countywide average for both the Existing General Plan and Proposed General Plan Update Build-Outs. Thus the General Plan Update would have a significant impact on Homebased VMT per resident. • The Proposed General Plan Update Build-Out projects lower Home-Based VMT rates than the Existing Plan Build-Out, but the two scenarios have similar Home-Work VMT rate projections.

Because the VMT metrics above address conditions in the year 2040, with other countywide development included in the assessments, the impact with respect to home-work VMT is considered significant for both Project and Cumulative conditions. Refer to section 2.1.4.3.2 for the mitigation measure for this impact.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1840 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
38 2.1.4.3.2 Cumulative Analysis
The year 2040 total countywide VMT per service population (all residents and employees) is shown in Table 4. These metrics reflect VMT generated by all trips by all land uses in the County, as well as nonCounty generated trips traveling on County roadways (i.e., all VMT within the Contra Costa County boundary). As shown in the table, countywide boundary VMT per service population would decrease with the Project, reflecting the travel efficiency that generally results from more dense, mixed-use development provided with the Project. Therefore, the cumulative impact with respect to total countywide VMT per service population would be less than significant.

As noted above in section 2.1.4.3.1, the impact with respect to home-work VMT is considered significant under cumulative conditions.

Table 4: Countywide VMT Summary
Metrics 2022 No Project 2040 with Existing
General Plan
2040 with Proposed
General Plan Update
Total 25,881,707 29,624,735 29,610,708
County Service Population 1,585,472 1,915,682 1,928,393 VMT/Service Population 16.324 15.464 15.355
Does VMT per service population
decrease with Project? --- --- Yes
Source: CCTA Travel Demand Model; Fehr & Peers, October 2022.

Mitigation Measure: The CCTA’s Growth Management Program Implementation Guide (Revised February 17, 2021), Appendix F (CCTA Recommended Methodology) describes options for mitigation of VMT impacts. The first two options below apply to development project and plans, and the third applies at a Citywide scale.

1. The project applicant shall modify the project’s characteristics to reduce VMT generated by the project prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. This might involve changing the density or mixture of land uses on the project site, or changing the project’s location to one that is more accessible by transit or other travel modes. The effectiveness of such changes should be modeled using the analysis techniques described in Part 3, above.

2. The project applicant shall implement transportation demand management (TDM) or physical design measures to reduce VMT generated by the project prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. A description of such options is included below, .

3. The City shall participate in a CCTA-approved VMT impact fee program and/or VMT mitigation exchange/banking program, when it is completed and published by CCTA. (Note that CCTA is developing such a program for Contra Costa County.)

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1841 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
39 The City shall require preparation and implementation of project-level TDM Plans with the following TDM measures for future land use development projects facilitated by the 2040 General Plan that do not meet CCTA screening criteria and thresholds.

Table 5: VMT Reduction Mitigation Measures
CAPCOA Handbook Measure Types of Projects Core Elements T-7: Commute Trip Reduction Marketing Employment-based
*Thoughtful marketing strategy
*Readily available commute information
*Designated TDM Coordinator
*Guaranteed Ride Home
T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program Employment-based
*Participation in a TMA with ride-matching program
*Preferential parking policies for carpools
*Promotions and incentives such as gas cards at
carpool formation
T-9: Implement Subsidized or Discounted
Transit Program
Residential, School,
Employment-based
*Location within 1/2 mile of major transit stop or
high quality transit corridor
*Participation in Commuter Benefits Program
*Easy to sign up for incentives
T-11: Provide Employer Sponsored
Vanpool / Point-to-Point Shuttles Employment-based
*Coordinate logistics of vanpool program
*Cover vanpool fares for riders through commute
benefits program
*Promote and facilitate vanpool creation
T-12: Price Workplace Parking Employment-based
*Location within 1/2 mile of transit service
*Priced at least $5 per day
*On-street parking nearby is not readily available
T-13: Implement Employee Parking
Cashout Employment-based
*Parking is provided as benefit
*On-street parking nearby is not readily available
*Participants pledge to not drive to work
T-16: Unbundle Residential Parking Costs Residential
*On-street parking nearby is not readily available
*All parking is priced at a rate at least $30
per month
T-23: Community-Based Travel Planning Residential, Retail, School
*Proactive outreach to all households in service
area or project
*Program Coordinator designated as lead in
promoting non-auto transportation
T-10: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle
Facilities All Projects
*Provision of secure bicycle parking in the form of
lockers, a locked storage room, or an attended
storage facility
*(For non-residential): Provision of lockers, showers,
and changing rooms
T-21A: Implement Carshare Program /
Provide Carshare Parking All Projects *Dedicate parking for carshare vehicles*Identify carshare partner T-15: Reduce Parking Supply Residential *On-street parking nearby is not readily available T-18: Provide Pedestrian Network
Improvements: All Projects Completion of one or more projects identified in the Solano County Active Transportation Plan

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1842 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
40 CAPCOA Handbook Measure Types of Projects Core Elements T-19-A and T-19-B: Construct or Improve
Bicycle Facility/Bicycle Boulevard All Projects
T-20: Expand Bikeway Network All Projects
T-26: Increase Transit Frequency All Projects in PDAs Increase the frequency of transit service by providing funding for more operators and vehicles
T-25: Increase Transit Coverage All Projects Expand transit service to areas without access to it, or expand to later/earlier hours.

T-23: Community-Based Travel Planning Residential, Retail, School
*Proactive outreach to all households in service
area or project
*Program Coordinator designated as lead in
promoting non-auto transportation
T-22: Bikeshare/Scootershare All Projects in PDAs
Fund and implement program providing e-bikes or
scooters available on demand. Ideally pursue a
"dockless" system.

Free E-Bike Program All Projects Provide e-bikes free of charge to households pledging to reduce vehicle trips
Source: Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions, Assessing Climate Change Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA, December 2021).

Because the effectiveness of the above measures in reducing the VMT impacts of new development under the General Plan Update to a less than significant level cannot be determined in this analysis, this impact remains significant and unavoidable with mitigation.

Criterion 3: Would the plan substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves of dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Impact 3: The 2040 General Plan is a program-level plan that does not directly address projectlevel design features. Roadway improvements and site access measures would be designed and reviewed in accordance with City standards. (Less Than Significant Impact.) The General Plan Update is a program-level document that does not directly address project-level design features or building specifications. Pleasant Hill maintains improvement standards that guide the construction of new transportation facilities to minimize design hazards for all users of the system.

Through the environmental review process, land use proposals that would add traffic to streets not designed to current standards are evaluated. If needed, mitigation measures are identified therein, and the project is conditioned to construct or provide funding for an improvement that would minimize or eliminate the hazard. Typical improvements Include shoulder widening, adding turn pockets, adding sidewalks or crosswalks, realigning sharp curves, prohibiting certain turning movements, signalizing intersections, and increasing sight distance, among other measures. New and upgraded roadways needed to accommodate new development would be designed according to applicable Federal, State, and local

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1843 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
41 design standards. Development and infrastructure projects in Pleasant Hill would be required to comply with the General Plan Update, Pleasant Hill Municipal Code, and applicable State and local regulations. As a result, and in consideration of the proposed General Plan Update’s policies regarding infrastructure safety, listed below, this impact would be less than significant. The General Plan Update establishes the following goals and policies that are intended to result in roadway designs that safely accommodate all users:

Goal TC-1: Establish and maintain a safe and efficient circulation system that emphasizes the use of existing arterial and collector roadways, paths, and bike lanes.

TC-2.1 Traffic Plan Requirement
Require new development to establish comprehensive construction traffic plans, for approval by City staff, which denote haul routes, detours, and other factors that may impact public safety. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 1.5] TC-2.6 Safe Routes to School (SR2S)
Establish a Safe Routes to School program in collaboration with the school districts and private schools that identifies and promotes suggested routes to school and incentivizes students and parents to use alternative transportation modes for school commutes. [New Policy]
Goal TC-3: Encourage slower vehicle speeds and discourage cut-through traffic along City roadways, especially within residential neighborhoods and along freeway bypass routes.

TC-3.1 Residential Streets
Prioritize traffic calming improvements and enforcement efforts along residential roadways that have recurring cut-through traffic or excessive speeding. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 4A, edited.]
TC-3.2 Arterial and Collector Streets
Minimize opportunities for regionally generated cut-through vehicle travel in the city as part of new roadway projects or projects within public roadways. [Source: New Policy] TC-3.3 Vehicle Traffic Calming Devices
Consider traffic calming devices such as lane narrowing, widening medians, neighborhood traffic circles, roundabouts, and landscaping to discourage cut-through vehicle traffic. [Source: New Policy]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1844 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
42 TC-3.4 Alternative Methods to Prevent Cut-Through Vehicle Traffic Consider the use of alternative street surfacing materials, traffic diverters, special designs, and stop signs to prevent cut-through traffic on residential streets. [Source: New Policy] TC-3.5 Monument Triangle Congestion
Support the reconfiguration of the Monument Triangle circulation network and to improve vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle safety while reducing congestion anticipated from future development. [Source: New Policy]
TC-3.6 School Area Congestion
Work with the Mount Diablo Unified School District, private schools, and Diablo Valley College to address traffic speeds and congestion near schools and on key access routes. [Source: New Policy]
Goal TC-5: Support a vibrant, walkable environment that encourages alternative (non-driving) modes of transportation.

TC-5.1 Evaluate Multi-modal Facility Needs
Evaluate the needs of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and/or access for new development as part of the review process, and require new development to incorporate transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access where feasible and appropriate, consistent with the Circulation Element and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (when adopted). [Source:

Existing General Plan, Growth Management Program 3.3]
TC-5.3. Mobility Technology Support
Identify and implement technology that supports walking, biking, commuting, and other alternative transportation modes within the City including infrastructure that supports micro mobility use within the City. [New Policy]
Goal TC-8: Encourage the development of a comprehensive and integrated transportation network with infrastructure and design features that allow safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, seniors, youth, and families.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1845 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
43 TC-8.2 Review for Complete Streets
Review street reconstruction, new development, and utility projects to incorporate complete street elements when feasible, including trails, bus stop enhancements, and bicycle/pedestrian facilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program

2.4, modified]
TC-8.3 Regional Complete Streets Planning
Coordinate internally and with other agencies to plan for the provision of complete streets regionally. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 2.7] TC-8.4 Multi-Modal Roadways
Consider the needs of vehicles, bicycle, and pedestrians on all city roadways and facilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Growth Management Policy 3A] TC-8.5 Reduce Vehicle Speeds
Support the reduction of vehicle speeds using engineering and design techniques, community education, and evaluation and planning strategies rather than relying solely on enforcement. [Source: New Policy]
TC-8.6 Wide Sidewalks for Shared Use
Provide wide sidewalks to allow shared use by pedestrians, bicyclists, and non-motorized modes of transportation as directed by the City Engineer. [Source: New Policy] TC-8.7 Limit Roadway Widening
Limit roadway widening and prioritize bicycle and pedestrian facility improvements within the right of way to increase roadway capacity that does not conflict with emergency access requirements. [Source: New Policy]
TC-8.11 Traffic Safety Corridors
Identify Traffic Safety Corridors along Suggested Routes to School and protected residential neighborhoods as allowed through California Assembly Bill 43 – Traffic Safety to establish lower speed streets to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. [Source: New Policy]
Goal TC-9: Prioritize a safe and connected pedestrian network for users of all ages and abilities.

TC-9.1 Pedestrian Safety
Maintain and upgrade the City’s pedestrian system by installing or upgrading sidewalks, warning devices, crosswalks, and other pedestrian aids where appropriate, including particular consideration for the needs of users of all ages and abilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 8A, modified]
TC-9.3 Enhance Pedestrian Crossings
Enhance pedestrian crossings on all arterial and collector roadways. [Source: New Policy]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1846 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
44 TC-9.4 Sidewalk Maintenance
Maintain existing sidewalk to meet ADA requirements, including removal or relocation of objects obstructing pedestrian path and installation of wider or detached sidewalks with a buffer separation from vehicular traffic, where feasible. [Source: New Policy] TC-9.5 Sidewalk Guidelines and Standards
Establish sidewalk standards and guidelines for enhancing existing sidewalk and installation of new sidewalks. [Source: New Policy]
TC-9.6 Planning for Pedestrian Improvements
Ensure all planning processes, such as PUD Concept Plans, master plans and specific plans, identify areas where pedestrian improvements can be made, such as new connections, increased sidewalk width, improved crosswalks, improved lighting, and new street furniture. [Source: New Policy]
TC-9.7 Enhance Street Lighting
Enhance street lighting to provide for better pedestrian safety. [Source: New Policy] Goal TC-10: Provide well-designed and well-maintained off-street paths and trails.

TC-10.2 Safe and Interconnected Trails
Work with other responsible/owner agencies to ensure the trails system is designed to be safe and interconnected, incorporating on-street connections where needed, designed for pedestrians and/or bicyclists, and consistent with other relevant plans. [Source: New Policy]
TC-10.3 Safe Trail Crossings
Provide safe trail crossings at surface streets for all non-motorized users. This requires the installation of signs, striping, pavement markings, and actuated traffic control devices, where applicable. [Source: New Policy]
Goal TC-11: Increase the number of bicycle and pedestrian trips by users of all ages and abilities.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1847 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
45 TC-11.3 Protected Bicycle Facilities
Consider incorporating protected bicycle and pedestrian facilities in higher density land use areas and along major transportation corridors to the greatest extent feasible. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 5.1, modified] Goal TC-12: Strive to eliminate all fatal and serious injury bicycle and pedestrian related crashes.

TC-14.1 Minimize Truck Conflicts
Minimize potential conflicts between trucks and pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel on streets designated as truck routes. [Source: New Policy]

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1848 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
46 TC-14.2 Minimize Truck Loading and Unloading Conflicts Minimize potential conflicts between truck loading and unloading and pedestrian, bicycle and transit travel. [Source: New Policy]
The above goals and policies are intended to result in roadway designs that safely accommodate all users including pedestrians, bikes, and vehicles. The General Plan Update does not directly propose any project features or incompatible uses that could increase hazards within the city. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

Criterion 4: Would the plan result in inadequate emergency access? Impact 4: The 2040 General Plan U identifies circulation goals and policies that would support emergency access throughout Pleasant Hill. (Less Than Significant Impact.) The 2040 General Plan does not propose specific development or infrastructure projects, therefore does not propose any developments or projects that could result in inadequate emergency access. The purpose of the General Plan Update in terms of transportation is to improve the overall performance of the transportation network for all modes of transportation. The General Plan Update would have a significant impact on emergency access if roadway geometric design features were not designed to City standards and standard engineering practices were not followed, thereby resulting in obstacles to emergency responders. The General Plan update includes the following goals and policies to ensure adequate emergency access to sites throughout Pleasant Hill:

Goal TC-1: Establish and maintain a safe and efficient circulation system that emphasizes the use of existing arterial and collector roadways, paths, and bike lanes.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1849 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
47 Goal TC-4: Reduce congestion and vehicle trips through land use planning.

TC-4.2 Develop Thoroughfares
Develop and improve thoroughfares based on existing and proposed land use patterns and projected demand. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Policy 5B] TC-4.5 Correlation Between Land Use and Transportation
Support land use patterns that make more efficient use of the transportation system, such as locating development near transit routes and high quality bicycle/pedestrian facilities, minimizing new driveways, consolidating parking, and other best practice urban design measures. [Source: Existing General Plan, Growth Management Goal 1, Edited] Goal TC-8: Encourage the development of a comprehensive and integrated transportation network with infrastructure and design features that allow safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, seniors, youth, and families.

TC-8.4 Multi-Modal Roadways
Consider the needs of vehicles, bicycle, and pedestrians on all city roadways and facilities. [Source: Existing General Plan, Circulation Program 2.4, modified] Goal HS-3: Minimize the threat to people, property, and the environment from fire hazards. [Source: Existing General Plan, Safety and Noise Goal 4, modified] Policy HS-3.11 Evacuation Routes. The City shall collaborate with Contra Costa County and neighboring cities as a part of the next Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update to identify evacuation routes in the event of wildfires or other natural disasters in compliance with AB 747 and SB 99. [Source: New Policy] Program H Contra Costa County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. The City shall actively participate in the next update of the Contra Costa Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan that, among other outcomes, will identify evacuation routes in the City in compliance with AB 747 and SB 99. (Source: New Program) Implementation of California Fire Code emergency vehicle access requirements and the aforementioned 2040 General Plan policies would ensure that there would be adequate emergency vehicle access throughout Pleasant Hill. Therefore, 2040 General Plan operational impacts related to emergency vehicle access adequacy would be less than significant.

The above goals are intended to result in roadway designs that safely accommodate all users, including emergency vehicles. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1850 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Pleasant Hill 2040 General Plan
Transportation Impact Analysis
January 2023
48 3. References
California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR), 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in California. December 2018. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122- 743_Technical_Advisory.pdf
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, 2021. Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity.

December 2021.
https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Final%20Handbook_AB434.pdf Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA). 2021. Contra Costa Transportation Authority Growth Management Program Implementation Guide. Available online: https://ccta.net/wpcontent/uploads/2021/08/GMP_Implementation_Guide_FINAL_ 02172021.pdf.

Pleasant Hill, City of. 2020. City of Pleasant Hill Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (September 2020 Draft).

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1851 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix 1:

VMT Analysis Flowchart

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1852 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Contra Costa Transportation Authority Growth Management Program 104 Revised February 17, 2021

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1853 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) Appendix 2:

Detailed Land Uses for Transportation
Analysis Scenarios

4.1.l
Packet Pg. 1854 Attachment: Attachment L - Draft EIR Appendices (General Plan and Housing Element) GPAC Preferred Land Use (2022) Max Buildout
Dwelling Units Non‐Residential Square Footage Population Employment Designation Acres Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Other TOTAL Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Other TOTALResidential Single‐Family Low Density 890.13 2,536 133                        ‐ 2,669                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 6,340 332                        ‐ 6,672                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Single‐Family Medium Density 1,128.06 4,568 507                        ‐ 5,075                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 11,420 1,267                      ‐ 12,687                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Single‐Family High Density 898.68 5,270 930                        ‐ 6,200                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 13,175 2,325                      ‐ 15,500                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Mangini‐Delu Residential 25.90 168 168                           ‐ 336                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 420 420                           ‐ 840                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family Very Low Density 80.71 672 288                           ‐ 960                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 1,680 720                        ‐ 2,400                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family Low Density 308.05 3,678 2,452                        ‐ 6,130                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 9,195 6,130                      ‐ 15,325                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family Medium Density 58.79                        ‐ 1,763                        ‐ 1,763                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐ 4,407                        ‐ 4,407                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family High Density 59.30                        ‐ 4,151                        ‐ 4,151                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐ 10,377                      ‐ 10,377                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Commercial and Mixed‐Use                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Commercial and Retail 137.26                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 1,674,130                    ‐ 478,320                            ‐                            ‐ 239,160                  ‐ 2,391,610                            ‐                            ‐ 5,231                        ‐ 1,427                            ‐                            ‐ 434 7,092 Mixed Use 144.58                      ‐ 4,337 4,337 708,520                    ‐ 472,340                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                  ‐ 1,180,860 10,842 10,842 2,214                        ‐ 1,409                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 3,623Mixed Use Neighborhood 22.41 22 44 66 366,000                    ‐ 256,200                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 622,200 55 110 165 1,143                           ‐ 764                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 1,907Mixed Use High Density 28.10                        ‐ 1,475 1,475 137,680                      ‐ 91,780                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                      ‐ 229,460 3,687 3,687 430                           ‐ 273                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 703Mixed Use Very High Density 26.90                        ‐ 2,017 2,017 149,370                      ‐ 99,580                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                      ‐ 248,950 5,042 5,042 466                           ‐ 297                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 763Cleaveland Multifamily Very High Density 2.33                          ‐ 162 162 12,940                        ‐ 8,630                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                        ‐ 21,570 405 405 40                             ‐ 25                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 65 Employment                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Office 69.10                        ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 240,810                    ‐ 963,260                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                  ‐ 1,204,070                            ‐                            ‐ 752                        ‐ 2,875                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 3,627 Neighborhood Business 7.80                          ‐                            ‐                            ‐                     ‐ 118,970                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                      ‐ 118,970                            ‐                            ‐                           ‐ 371                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 371Semi‐Public and Institutional 103.15                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                ‐ 1,797,200                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                  ‐ 1,797,200                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                        ‐ 5,364                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 5,364Light Industrial 126.3                      ‐ 4                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                    ‐ 181,600 1,634,440                  ‐ 1,816,040                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 2,971 2,971School 230.47                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 7,529,600                  ‐ 7,529,600                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 13,690 13,690 Other                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Park 156.22                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Open Space 296.38                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Misc 0.21                          ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ SOI ‐ NO GPLU 11.62                        ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Total 4,812.48 16,914 18,427 35,341 3,408,420                ‐ 4,167,310                    ‐ 181,600 9,403,200 17,160,530 42,285 46,064 88,349 10,647                      ‐ 12,434                            ‐                            ‐ 17,095 40,176 Existing General Plan Land Use Max Buildout
Dwelling Units Non‐Residential Square Footage Population Employment Designation Acres Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Other TOTAL Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Other TOTALResidential Single‐Family Low Density 890.13 2,536 133                        ‐ 2,669                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 6,340 332                        ‐ 6,672                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Single‐Family Medium Density 1,153.36 4,671 519                        ‐ 5,190                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 11,677 1,297                      ‐ 12,974                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Single‐Family High Density 964.59 5,657 998                        ‐ 6,655                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 14,142 2,495                      ‐ 16,637                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family Very Low Density 80.71 672 288                           ‐ 960                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 1,680 720                        ‐ 2,400                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family Low Density 303.78 3,627 2,418                        ‐ 6,045                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 9,067 6,045                      ‐ 15,112                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family Medium Density 58.79                        ‐ 1,763                        ‐ 1,763                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐ 4,407                        ‐ 4,407                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Multi‐Family High Density 59.30                        ‐ 4,151                        ‐ 4,151                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐ 10,377                      ‐ 10,377                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Commercial and Mixed‐Use
Commercial and Retail 157.03                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 1,915,250                    ‐ 547,210                            ‐                            ‐ 273,600                  ‐ 2,736,060                            ‐                            ‐ 5,985                        ‐ 1,633                            ‐                            ‐ 497 8,115 Mixed Use 107.1                      ‐ 4 3,214 3,214 525,060                    ‐ 350,040                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                      ‐ 875,100 8,035 8,035 1,640                        ‐ 1,044                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 2,684Mixed Use Neighborhood                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Mixed Use High Density                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Mixed Use Very High Density                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Cleaveland Multifamily Very High Density                          ‐ 2.33 108 108 8,600                        ‐ 5,490                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                        ‐ 14,090 270 270 26                             ‐ 16                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 42 Employment
Office 89.99                        ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 313,600                ‐ 1,254,400                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                  ‐ 1,568,000                            ‐                            ‐ 980                        ‐ 3,744                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 4,724 Neighborhood Business 18.62                        ‐                            ‐                            ‐                     ‐ 283,890                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                      ‐ 283,890                            ‐                            ‐                           ‐ 887                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 887Semi‐Public and Institutional 106.07                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                ‐ 1,848,130                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                  ‐ 1,848,130                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                        ‐ 5,516                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 5,516Light Industrial 126.3                      ‐ 4                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                    ‐ 181,600 1,634,440                  ‐ 1,816,040                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 2,971 2,971School 241.47                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 7,888,750                  ‐ 7,888,750                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ 14,343 14,343 Other
Park 156.32                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Open Space 287.03                      ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Misc 0.21                          ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                              ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ SOI ‐ NO GPLU 11.62                        ‐                            ‐                            ‐                             ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐                            ‐ Total 4,814.81 17,163 13,592 30,755 3,046,400                ‐ 4,005,270                    ‐ 181,600 9,796,790 17,030,060 42,906 33,978 76,884 9,518                      ‐ 11,953                            ‐                            ‐ 17,811 39,282 Citywide Summary Comparison
Dwelling Units Non‐Residential Square Footage Population Employment Acres Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Other TOTAL Single Family Multifamily TOTAL Retail Service Agriculture Manufacturing Wholesale Other TOTAL GPAC Preferred Alternative Max Buildout 4,812.48 16,914 18,427 35,341 3,408,420                ‐ 4,167,310                    ‐ 181,600 9,403,200 17,160,530 42,285 46,064 88,349 10,647                      ‐ 12,434                            ‐                            ‐ 17,095 40,176 Existing General Plan Max Buildout 4,814.81 17,163 13,592 30,755 3,046,400                ‐ 4,005,270                    ‐ 181,600 9,796,790 17,030,060 42,906 33,978 76,884 9,518                      ‐ 11,953                            ‐                            ‐ 17,811 39,282 Difference ‐ (249) 4,835 4,586 362,020                    ‐ 162,040                           ‐                           ‐ (393,590) 130,470 (621) 12,086 11,465 1,129                           ‐ 481                           ‐                           ‐ (716) 894 Difference as Percent ‐ ‐1.5% 35.6% 14.9% 11.9% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ‐4.0% 0.8% ‐1.4% 35.6% 14.9% 11.9% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ‐4.0% 2.3%

Pleasant Hill City CouncilMay 18, 2023

Pleasant Hill City Council
May 18, 2023