Loading...
Neg Dec - Initial Study for GP - 2001e NEGATIVE DECLARATION City of Campbell General Plan Update Project Description The City of Campbell is proposing to update the existing City of Campbell General Plan with the exception of the Housing Element, which is scheduled for updating by December 2001. The purpose of a city's general plan is to guide decisions regarding physical growth and development, provision of public services and facilities, and conservation and enhancement of natural resources. General plans typically look 20 years into the future and are revised every five to ten years. Most of the Cites General Plan elements were adopted ten years ago or more. Campbell's first General Plan was adopted in 1960 and revised in 1968. Revised Land Use and Circulation Elements were adopted in 1983 and were amended in 1990, 1991, and 1993. Conservation and Scenic Highways Elements were adopted in 1972. In 1975, the Seismic, Safety, and Noise Elements were adopted. The Air Quality Element was adopted in 1987, the Open Space Element was adopted in 1990, and the latest Housing Element was adopted in 1992. Although the community vision and goals for Campbell have not changed substantially since the adoption of the first General Plan, some fine-tuning must be made to reflect current population, community conditions, and State requirements. The General Plan Update includes six of the seven elements required by State law -Land Use, Circulation, Open Space, Conservation, Safety and Noise. Presently, there are approximately 16,552 residential units and 9.5 million square feet of commercial and industrial area within the City of Campbell. The existing General Plan land use designations would allow the development of up to 18,053 residential units and 12.4 million square feet of commercial and industrial area. These numbers represent a nine percent increase in residential units and a 30 percent increase in commercial/industrial area over the physically existing amounts within the City. The proposed General Plan land use designations would allow approximately 18,152 residential units (a 10 percent increase over the physically existing units) and 11.4 million square feet of commercial and industrial area (a 20 percent increase) over existing conditions. The ultimate result of the proposed changes would be an increase of approximately 99 more residential units and a decrease of approximately one million square feet of commercial and industrial uses from those amounts planned for in the existing General Plan. As such, the proposed General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. Findings of No Significant Effect on the Environment An Initial Study has been prepared for the City of Campbell Community Development Department, which has determined that the General Plan Update would not result in significant effects on the environment. ND-1 City of Campbell General Plan Update CITY OF CAMPBELL INITIAL STUDY 1. INTRODUCTION This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with relevant provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 as amended and the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that the purposes of an Initial Study are to: 1. Provide the lead agency, in this case the City of Campbell, with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) or negative declaration; 2. Enable an applicant or lead agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to quality for a negative declaration; 3. Assist the preparation of a EIR, if one is required, by: a. Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, b. Identifying the effects determined not to be significant, c. Explaining the reasons why potentially significant effects would not be significant, and d. Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis of a project's environmental effects. 4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project; 5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment; 6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs; 7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. According to Section 15063(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, if the lead agency determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the lead agency shall do one of the following: 1. Prepare an EIR, 2. Use a previously prepared EIR which the lead agency determines would adequately analyze the project at hand, or 3. Determine, pursuant to a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process, which of a project's effects were adequately examined by an earlier EIR or negative declaration. The lead agency shall then ascertain which effects, if any, should be analyzed in a later EIR or negative declaration. IS-1 City of Campbell General Plan Update City of Campbell General Plan Update 2. PROJECT INFORMATION 1. Project Title: City of Campbell General Plan Update 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Campbell 70 N. First Street Campbell, California 95008-1423 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, (408) 866-2140, FAX (408) 866-8381 4. Project Location: As shown in Figure 1, the City of Campbell is located approximately 50 miles south of San Francisco in Santa Clara County, one of the nine counties that make up the region known as the San Francisco Bay Area. The City occupies 5.8 square miles (3,718 acres including roads) of relatively flat land that slopes gently toward the south end of the San Francisco Bay. As shown in Figure 2, Campbell is bounded on the north, east, and west by the City of San Jose and on the south by the Town of Los Gatos. A small portion of Campbell's southwestern boundary is adjacent to the City of Saratoga. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Campbell 70 N. First Street Campbell, California 95008-1423 6. Project Description: The project evaluated in this Initial Study is an update of the existing City of Campbell General Plan with the exception of the Housing Element, which is scheduled for updating by December 2001. The purpose of a city's general plan is to guide decisions regarding physical growth and development, provision of public services and facilities, and conservation and enhancement of natural resources. General plans typically look 20 years into the future and are revised every five to ben years. Most of the City's General Plan elements were adopted ten years ago or more. Campbell's first General Plan was adopted in 1960 and revised in 1968. Revised Land Use and Circulation Elements were adopted in 1983 and were amended in 1990, 1991, and 1993. Conservation and Scenic Highways Elements were adopted in 1972. In 1975, the Seismic, Safety, and Noise Elements were adopted. The Air Quality Element was adopted in 1987, the Open Space Element was adopted in 1990, and the latest Housing Element was adopted in 1992. Although the community vision and goals for Campbell have not changed substantially since the adoption of the first General Plan, some fine-tuning must be made to reflect current population, community conditions, and State requirements. The General Plan Update includes six of the seven elements required by State law -Land Use, Circulation, Open Space, Conservation, Safety and Noise. Table 1 shows how the Campbell General Plan elements correspond to State required elements. IS-2 Initial Study ->, t ,h ; ~ ». ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x t~ ~ ;~~, , :`e .., . ~ .~ .,t~" • S A N FRANC 1 S G O ,, zr. `~~'~ _^' ,S„? r~ ~' Y ~,;, ~~~ sa .. • t. ~, , ~ ~ ~ ,. ,. 4 .,~L ~ .~ _ ~' ~ ;... r. , '~"° »t. .F7"` 4. -: ~l "Y Tit ''~: y ''c ;.ev .h ~' ~ ~ - E '~ 4~ , '`!_ - dv r"+sa~ ibik' L'7~f4~r'it,.'L tip., .. '~~' '. 4 !cis? ~~ ?~k ~.j '°r~ ~~rs,~~.y,#„c+~F~ .. 0 f~ L r ~~ 3 +~ ~~~ s ~~ ~ ~ •PALO ALA ~? •MILPI'1'AS _ ~ ~ ,- ., .:..,'MOUNTAIN VIEW • •SUNNYVALE s!!, ~' ~.- ,: P " ~' is "' ~~. SANTA CLA.RA ~ SAN JOSE ~ ~, ~~ ~ --~ ~ CUPERTiNO L ;, ~: ~ ~ , r Cc~m 6eCC :.. _~ _ _ p __ ..~ . ~ ~ ~ ~~~-. • LOS GATOS ;!Y ~: ,~ x ~: ~ ORGAN H i LL ~.~.~' G ILROY ,. - ' ~:` .~~' ~~ n t ., -~ , ? ~ ~ a, r . ~' A f 1i s f ..µ ~ '. S ~. ' S A N TA ~ C RrU~ ~ ~ ~= Figure 1: Regional Location IS-3 City of Campbell General Plan Update ~~~Mn', City of Campbell ~-: _,;- A Scale 1" = 3,000 $ Figure 2: Campbell City Limits Campbell Community Development Departmea~t September 2000 IS-4 Initial Study Table 1: Correspondence Between Required Elements and Campbell General Plan Elements Required Element < Campbell General Plan Element Land Use Land Use and Transportation Circulation Land Use and Transportation Open Space Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Conservation Conservation and Natural Resources Safety Health and Safety Noise Conservation and Natural Resources Housing Housing Source: The City of Campbell General Plan, Public Review Draft, September 2000, p. I-7. The adoption of the General Plan Update would not result in any physical changes to the environment. The adoption of the proposed land use designation changes could, however, result in some impacts to the environment. For the purpose of this analysis, this Initial Study focuses on those land use changes that would have a potential impact if the proposed land use plan is implemented. Presently, there are approximately 16,552 residential units and 9.5 million square feet of commercial and industrial area within the City of Campbell. Table 2 identifies the existing and proposed land use designation areas and the net changes. The existing General Plan land use designations would allow the development of up to 18,053 residential units and 12.4 million square feet of commercial and industrial area. These numbers represent a nine percent increase in residential units and a 30 percent increase in commercial/industrial area over the physically existing amounts within the City. The proposed General Plan land use designations would allow approximately 18,152 residential units (a 10 percent increase over the physically existing units) and 11.4 million square feet of commercial and industrial area (a 20 percent increase) over existing conditions. The ultimate result of the proposed changes would be an increase of approximately 99 more residential units and a decrease of approximately one million square feet of commercial and industrial uses from those amounts planned for in the existing General Plan. As such, the proposed General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. A copy of the Public Review Draft General Plan may be reviewed at the City of Campbell City Hall, Community Development Department, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California, weekdays between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. Contact Sharon Fierro, Community Development Director, (408) 866-2140, FAX (408) 866-8381. , 7. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None. IS-5 City of Campbell General Plan Update Existing ~ Proposed' _ General ~ General~;~~ . . I~et ~hang~e ~. Plan Plan (Acres) (Proposed- Residential Low Density Residential (less than 3.5 Units/ Gross Acre) 140.1 140.7 0.6 Low Density Residential (less than 4.5 Units) 141.3 142.2 0.9 Low Density Residential (less than 6 Units) 998.1 1011.9 13.8 Low-Medium Density Residential (6-13 Units/Gr. Acre) 165.6 157.2 -8.4 Medium Density Residential (14-20 Units/ Gr. Acre) 175.5 185.2 9.8 High Density Residential (21-27 Units/ Gr. Acre) 170.1 174.6 4.5 Mobile Home Park 26.9 26.9 0.0 Commercial/ Office/Industrial Commercial 323.7 -323.7 Central Commercial ~ 58.3 58.3 General Commercial 190.7 190.7 Neighborhood Commercial 43.8 43.8 Professional Office 33.6 38.4 4.8 Office- Commercial or Industrial 1.0 -1.0 Industrial 217.4 -217.4 Light Industrial 43.5 43.5 Research and Development 169.6 169.6 Mixed Use Medium Density ResidentiaU Professional Office 5.4 -5.4 Medium Density Residential and/or Commercial 1.7 -1.7 Medium to High Density Residential /Commercial 16.7 High Density ResidentiaU Professional Office 3.8 -3.8 ResidentiaUCommerciaUIndustrial 18.6 -18.6 Low Density ResidentiaU Professional Office 0.7 -0.7 Low-Medium Density Residential /Commercial 7.4 -7.4 Low-Medium Density ResidentiaU Office 3.2 3.8 0.6 Low-Medium ResidentiaU Industrial 0.7 -0.7 Commercial and/or Industrial 32.5 -32.5 Total 2,930.6 2,930.6 Source: City of Campbell, September 2000. IS-6 Table 2: Comparison of Land Use Designation Areas for Existing and Proposed General Plans Initial Study 3. DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities/Service Systems Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology/VVater Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance Air Quality Geology/Soils Land Use/Planning Population/Housing Transportation/Traffic ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ® I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. IS-7 City of Campbell General Plan Update Prepared By: Impact Sciences, Inc. September 21, 2000 Date IS-8 haron Fierro, Community Development Director Initial Study 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS EXPLANATION OF EVALUATIONS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on aproject-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a pazticular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, and E1R is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses;' may becross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they aze available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standazds, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the eazlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated; ' describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. ~ Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant levels. IS-9 City of Campbell General Plan Updafe EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: PoteMialy AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Significant Significant Unless Less than Signfcant a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not ^ ~ ® ^ limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ^ ^ ® ^ quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which ~ ~ ® ^ would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Documentation: a. The residents of Campbell have views of the Sierra Azules and Santa Cruz Mountains to the southwest. They also have views of scenic resources within the City such as open space areas (for example, the Los Gatos Creek and the Santa Clara Valley Water District Groundwater Rechazge Facilities). Development under the General Plan Update would not occur in areas that have not previously been planned for urban uses. Therefore, no new areas would be developed that could affect the views of scenic vistas within or beyond the City limits. b. The Conservation and Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies and strategies for the protection of historic and biological resources. The Land Use and Transportation Element also includes goals, policies and strategies for the protection of historic resources. Goals, policies and strategies that address resources within open space areas are provided in the Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update. No roadway or highway segments within the City have been designated as scenic highways. c. The Land Use and Transportation Element of the General Plan Update provides a number of goals, policies and strategies that address community design within the City. Many of these ideas are based on Campbell's Community Design Study, which was prepared in 1991. This element also provides goals, policies and strategies that address issues specific to the following seven Special Project Areas: • Pruneyard/Creekside Commercial District • North of Campbell Avenue (NOCA) • County of Campbell Avenue (SOCA) • San Tomas Areas Neighborhood Plan (STANP) • Redevelopment Project Area Boundary • Downtown • Downtown Neighborhood d. The City is fully urbanized. No substantial amount of light or glare would be produced as a result of the adoption of the General Plan Update and its subsequent implementation. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding aesthetics. IS-10 Initial Study 11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Califomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Califomia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Documentation: Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unbss Less then Significant Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact a-c. Although historically referred to as the "Orchard City", Campbell currently contains no agricultural land. There were no areas of the City designated for agriculture under the existing General Plan and none are proposed in the General Plan Update. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding agricultural resources. IS-11 City of Campbell General Plan Update III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air Potentially pollution control district may be relied upon to make the Potentially Significant Less than following determinations. Would the project: Significant Unless Significant a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing tx projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any ^ criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Documentation: a. The City of Campbell is located within the southern region of the San Francisco Bay Area air basin. The management of air quality in the basin is the responsibility of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Specifically, the BAAQMD is responsible for monitoring ambient air pollutant levels throughout the basin, and developing and implementing attainment strategies to ensure that future emissions will be within federal and State standards. The federal and State Clean Air Acts require the preparation of plans to reduce air pollution to healthful levels. The BAAQMD has responded to this requirement by preparing the Bay Area '91 Clean Air Plan which has been updated twice, in 1994 and 1997, with the continued goal of improving air quality through tighter industry controls, cleaner fuels and combustion in cars and trucks and increased commute alternatives. The City is responsible for implementing certain transportation control measures outlined in the current Clean Air Plan. Measures that are consistent with this requirement are identified as goals, policies, and strategies in the Land Use and Transportation Element of the General Plan Update. Other goals, policies, and strategies that address air quality are provided in the Conservation and Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Update. The population projections utilized in the development of the General Plan Update are consistent with the projections developed by the Association of Bay Area Governments and used in the preparation of the 1997 Clean Air Plan. The General Plan Update is also less intensive than the existing General Plan. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Update would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 1997 Clean Air Plan. b-c. The General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in an increase of approximately 99 more residential units and a decrease of approximately one million squaze feet of commercial and industrial uses from those amounts planned for in the existing General Plan. The overall effect would be less city-wide traffic generation and associated air emissions. This is considered a beneficial impact. IS-12 Initial Study New development projects in Campbell are assessed based on the 1996 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines that were designed to assist local governments and consultants in preparing the air quality sections of environmental documents for projects subject to CEQA. Specifically, the City assesses both short- and long-term air quality impacts, requires mitigation of potential impacts with permit conditions, and monitors and enforces implementation of such mitigation. d. As discussed under item "a" above, implementation of the General Plan Update would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 1997 Clean Air Plan. The General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that help to improve the local and regional air quality. Consequently, sensitive receptors in the City would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations. e. The proposed changes to the General Plan would not result in any increased exposure of people to objectionable odors. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding air quality. IS-13 Cih~ of Campbell General Plan Update IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless less than Significant Impact AAitlgated Impact No Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through h bit t dif i ^ ^ ® ^ mo icat a a ons, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or i ^ other sens tive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected l d f ~ ^ wet ands as e ined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native i i f ^ ^ ® ^ res dent or m gratory ish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildNfe nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting bi l i l h ^ ^ ® a o og ca resources, suc as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ^ ^ ® a Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Documentation: a-d, & f. Although native vegetation in the City was eliminated decades ago for ranching and orchards, much of Campbell provides habitat for wildlife species commonly associated with suburban areas. The riparian vegetation along Los Gatos and San Tomas Aquino Creeks supports a greater variety of animal wildlife species than the developed area of the City, and they provide a corridor for wildlife movement. The creek corridors provide habitat for a number of mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and introduced fish species. Trees along these creeks provide cover, feeding, and nesting sites for a variety of birds. There are currently no rare, threatened, endangered, or sensitive animals, plants, or natural communities within the City limits, according to the California Department of Fish and Game's Natural Diversity Database. However, the absence of any special status species from this Database does not necessarily mean that there is no chance that they may be found in the City, only that no occurrence data is currently entered into the Database. However, since Campbell is a very urbanized environment, it is not likely that there are any unrecorded species in the City. Because no new areas are designated for development in the General Plan Update, no new impacts to animal and plant resources would occur. Goals, policies, and strategies are IS-14 Initial Study provided in the Conservation and Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Update that would protect and maintain animal and plant species and supporting habitats within the City. e. The City maintains approximately 1,000 trees on major arterials and median islands, and approximately 9,000 trees on residential streets. These trees enhance the City's identity, community image and sense of place by adding a natural element to the urban environment. The City has been a designated "Tree City USA" for the past eighteen years, which is a national recognition for the City's urban and community forestry programs. This program is sponsored by the National Arbor Day Foundation in cooperation with the USDA Forest Service and the National Association of State Foresters. The City met specific standards to attain this designation, including the adoption of a Tree Protection Ordinance and the observance and proclamation of an annual Arbor Day Celebration. The proposed General Plan will not conflict with the existing Tree Protection Ordinance. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding biological resources. IS-15 City of Campbell General Plan Update V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless Less than Significant a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of tmpad Mitigated Impact No Impact a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.57 c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, inducting those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Documentation: a-d. The City's Historic Preservation Ordinance designates a historic overlay zoning district for the purpose of identifying, preserving, and enhancing structures, natural features, sites, and areas within the City that have historic, architectural, archaeological, cultural, and/or aesthetic significance. The Historic Preservation Board oversees the provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance and recommends measures to implement historic preservation to the City Council and City commissions. Currently the Alice Avenue area is the City's only multi-parcel Historic Overlay District. The Alice Avenue homes were constructed for fruit canners and packers around the turn of the century. The City is currently updating its inventory of historic resources, many of which are single-family residences near the historic downtown core. The City may also consider designating additional Historic Districts. Goals, policies and strategies addressing this and other historic resources are included in the Conservation and Natural Resources Element and the Transportation and Land Use Element of the General Plan Update. Further Stud~Required: No further analysis is required regarding cultural resources. IS-16 Initial Study VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless toss than Significant a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial Impact ^ Mitigated ~ Impact ® No Impact a adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alqufst-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ~ ^ ® ^ iii. Seismio-related ground failure, incuding liquefaction? ~ ~ ® ^ iv. Landslides? b. Result In substantial soil erosion or the kus of topsoil? ~ a c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ~ ^ ^ that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1&1-B of ^ ^ ® ^ the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ^ ~ ^ septic tanks or aitemative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Documentation: a-e. Campbell is subject to the effects of earthquakes due to its location at the tectonic boundary between the Pacific and North American Plates. The movement of these plates led to the accumulation of strain energy in the crustal rocks of the Bay Area. The release of strain energy by the sudden movement of a fault creates eazthquakes. Several active faults in the Bay Area region create a high likelihood of future seismic events affecting the City. Recognition of the likelihood of these events and preparation for the potential effects of them is necessary to reduce the potential damage to life and property. On the basis of research conducted since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the United States Geological Surveys (USGS) and other scientists conclude that there is a seventy percent (t10%) probability of at least one magnitude 6.7 or greater quake, capable of causing widespread damage, striking the San Francisco Bay Area region before 2030, as shown in Table HS-1. There is a 21 % chance of one magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake created by the San Andreas Fault before the yeaz 2030. The probability of at least one smaller (magnitude 6.0 to 6.7) earthquake in the Bay Area before 2030 is estimated to be at least eighty percent. Earthquake probabilities are based on balancing the continual motions of the plates that make up the Earth's outer shell with the slip on faults, which occurs primarily during earthquakes. To determine Bay Area region earthquake probabilities, the USGS Working Group gathered s U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 99-517: Earthquake Probabilities iri the San Francisco Bay Area 2000-2030: A Summary of Findings. http://geopubs.wr.usgs. og, v/open-file/of99-517/ IS-17 City of Campbell General Plan Update new data, developed analytical tools, and debated a wide variety of interpretations about how future earthquakes may occur. The San Andreas Fault, the Hayward-Rodgers Creek Fault and the Calaveras Fault pose the greatest eazthquake threat, because they have high quake odds and run through the Santa Clara Valley region's urban core. However, there are also smaller faults located closer to Campbell that also have the potential to cause earthquakes, such as the Shannon-Monte Vista Fault, which extends through southwestern Campbell, is considered active by Santa Clara County but not the State. The Sargent 13errocal Fault System is located to the south of Campbell in Los Gatos. The geologic formations in the City of Campbell range in age from Holocene to Pleistocene. Approximately 85 percent of the City is underlain by Holocene alluvial fan deposits. These deposits have a low susceptibility to liquefaction. There is a small occurrence of Pleistocene fluvial terrace deposits in the southwestern portion of the City. These terraces grade to Pleistocene alluvial fan surfaces. Holocene Fluvial deposits are located along the narrow channel of the Los Gatos Creek and the percolation basins south of Camden Avenue. These deposits overlie alluvial sediments of Pliocene to Pleistocene age and interfinger with alluvial fan and estuarine sediments of Holocene age. They have a moderate susceptibility to liquefaction and lateral spreading. Minimizing seismic risk begins with development, especially critical facilities, avoiding the most hazardous areas, as mapped by State and Federal agencies. The next line of defense is proper emergency planning to help minimise the loss of life and property and to speed recovery. Improved construction techniques to resist the effects of earthquakes can also help reduce risks to citizens. The Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that address impacts from natural hazards. The City also requires all new development to meet adopted standards for the geotechnical considerations of the individual project site. No areas of the City are prone to landslide potential, and all new developments are connected to the City's sanitary sewer system. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding geology and soils. IS-18 Initial Study VII. HAZARDS. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless Less than Significant a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ~ ~ M'IL'gated ^ Impact No I~ d through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ^ through reasonably foreseeable upset and acddent conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ^ hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is lnduded on a list of ^ ^ ® ^ hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Sedion 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a signifpnt hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ^ ^ ® ^ where such plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result In a safety hazard far people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ^ ^ ^ the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically intertere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ~ ^ ^ injury or death involving wildland fires, induding where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Documentation: a-d. Some businesses and industrial activities in the City are involved in the transport, storage, or use of toxic or hazardous materials that pose a potential safety hazard in the event of unintentional exposure, leak, fire, or accident. Some hazardous materials are byproducts of industrial processes. Residents in Campbell also generate household hazardous wastes such as waste oil, paint, solvents, cleaners, pesticides, and glue. The City of Campbell participates in the implementation of Santa Clara County's 1991 Hazardous Waste Management Plan. The Plan establishes the framework for hazardous waste management efforts, including goals and policies relating to hazardous waste generation, management, reduction, facilities siting, and transport. The overall goal of the Plan is to protect public health, safety and the environment by reducing the generation of hazardous waste. The Plan may be updated periodically. State Assembly Bill 2707 requires each city to characterize and quantify its household waste stream and develop plans for safe collection, recycling, treatment, and disposal of household hazardous wastes. The 1992 Campbell Household Hazardous Waste Element seeks to: IS-19 City of Campbell General Plan Lipdate • Provide residents access to convenient household hazardous waste collection services. • Expand curbside motor oil collection programs to include all single and multi-family homes. • Minimize disposal of collected wastes through distribution of reusable materials and recycling. • Improve monitoring and evaluation of household hazardous waste programs. • Limit improper disposal of hazardous waste at solid waste landfills by continuing State- mandatedhazardous waste exclusion programs. • Increase efficiency and effectiveness of waste collection services and public education by coordinating programs with other jurisdictions and agencies whenever feasible. • Decrease potential short- and long-term liability risks by monitoring environmental compliance records and proof of insurance of contract waste haulers and contract treatment, storage and disposal activities. • Increase source reduction options for residents by supporting legislative efforts aimed at promoting development of safer products and safer waste management methods. No changes are proposed to the land use plan that would locate new industrial uses within 1/4mile of an existing school facility. The Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that address hazardous materials and waste. e-f. Hazards associated with aircraft overflight are principally related to the risk of accidents along primary San Jose International Airport and San Francisco International Airport paths. These hazards are addressed in the Master Plan of each airport. Both Master Plans also show hazard zones extending north and south at the end of each runway. During inclement weather, the San Jose and San Francisco airport flight patterns are shifted over Campbell and increase the risk of aircraft accidents in the City as well as the amount of aircraft overflight noise. The airport Master Plans propose to change flight patterns to increase the frequency of overflight in the City. The City will advocate reducing the amount of overflight. There would be no increase in the risk of aircraft hazards associated with the proposed land use changes. The Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update also provides a goal, policies, and strategies that address the hazards associated with aircraft overflights. g. Campbell has adopted an Emergency Plan to help manage the local response to emergencies that could affect the City, in accordance with Government Code Section 8607, which aims to establish a uniform framework of emergency preparation and response statewide. The primary goal of the Emergency Plan is to guide local decision-makers and emergency personnel in ways of handling emergencies in Campbell that are consistent with the State requirements and are in coordination with other State and local agencies and plans. The Plan emphasizes preparedness in advance of emergencies and the development of appropriate and timely responses to emergencies when they occur. The Emergency Plan is discussed in greater detail in the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update. This element also provides a goal, policies, and strategies that address emergency preparedness. h. 'The City is located within, and surrounded by, an existing urban environment that does not have a high potential for wildland fire hazard. Further Stud~Required: No further analysis is required regarding hazards and hazardous materials. IS-20 Initial Study VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Potentialy SlpniRcant Less than Significant Unbss Significant Im MiGg ated ct No l Im a ~ ® a b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ^ ^ ® ^ substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, incuding through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ^ ~ ® ^ or area, induding through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ^ g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ^ ^ ® ^ mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which ~ ~ ® ^ would impede or redirect flood flows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ~ ~ ® ^ injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, a mudflow? ^ ^ ® ^ Documentation: a. Point sources of water pollution are regulated through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process. Permits are required for all publicly operated treatment plants and for specific operations or sites that generate surface-water runoff in urban areas. The permits specify the discharge limits for certain pollutants and require specific industries to pre-treat the pollutants that they discharge into treatment plants. For the purposes of administering NPDES, the State Water Resources Control Boazd has oversight of nine Regional Water Pollution Control Boards located in each of the major California watersheds. The Boards have primary responsibility for administration, investigation, and enforcement of the State's pollution abatement program. The Boards may regulate any discharge of wastewaters including process, cleaning, cooling, or other waters coming from a facility, or other wastes. These include dischazges directly to surface waters, to storm drains, to the ground surface, or to groundwater. Campbell is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. The local permits and Storm IS-21 City of Campbell General Plan Update Water Management Plan are discussed in the Open Space, Pazks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update. Goals, policies, and strategies are also provided in the Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities, and Conservation and Natural Resources Elements of the General Plan Update that address water quality. b. The regional wholesale supplier of water to the South Bay Area is the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), which derives water from local, recycled, and imported supplies. Less than half of the District's water is supplied by local rainfall and groundwater. The rainwater is stored in ten local reservoirs, and some of it is transferred to the District's Groundwater Recharge Facilities. The District owns more than 30 groundwater recharge facilities, six of which comprise 85 acres along Los Gatos Creek in Campbell. These facilities percolate both local and imported water into the groundwater aquifer. The average yearly surface flow that can be captured and diverted to reservoirs, treatment plants, or the groundwater basin is about 101,000 acre-feet per yeaz; natural recharge into the groundwater basin adds another 112,000 acre-feet. During critical dry periods these amounts average only 59,000 acre-feet and 74,000 acre-feet, respectively. Implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in development on land that has not already been planned for development. Therefore, the Update would not interfere with groundwater recharge within the City. The proposed General Plan Update is also less intensive than the existing General Plan. Therefore, the overall demand for water, both local and imported, would be reduced. The General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that encourage local participation in water conservation efforts. c-e. The City operates and maintains a storm water drainage system and coordinates with surrounding jurisdictions and Santa Clara County to provide regional storm drainage for the Santa Claza Valley. Since Campbell is almost entirely developed, there is a large amount of impermeable surface area. The drainage system consists of a series of inlets and pipes that channel storm runoff to Los Gatos and San Tomas Aquino creeks, both of which discharge into San Francisco Bay. Drainage improvements are planned by the City to enable additional development while preventing flooding. The General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address storm drainage facilities. During and following heavy rains, materials discharged into a storm drain aze carried directly to surface and ocean water. Because of the adverse effect of these discharges, the Clean Water Act requires that communities and industries obtain NPDES permits to discharge storm water to urban storm sewer systems. The EPA also requires permits for storm water runoff from 11 different categories of industrial activities. These industrial activities include certain manufacturing facilities, wastewater treatment plants, hazardous waste treatment plants, hazardous waste treatment storage, disposal facilities and construction activities where there is a land disturbance of five acres or more, and others. The City is required by the Clean Water Act to obtain a NPDES municipal stormwater permit. Campbell's municipal stormwater permit is shared with the 13 cities of Santa Clara Valley, the County of Santa Clara, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District who have joined together to create the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The overarching purpose of the program is to protect the beneficial uses of watersheds of the Santa Clara Valley and the South Bay, with an emphasis on pollution prevention and integrated watershed management. This program includes pollution control measure activities which reduce or eliminate pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent practicable. The keystone of this program is the Storm Water Management Plan. This plan was first developed in 1991 and is updated every five years. It focuses on desired results, such as reductions in specific priority pollutants and heavy metal concentrations in the IS-22 Initial Study Valley's streams and loadings to the South Bay, as well as initiation of a comprehensive watershed management approach to pollutant reduction and resource protection. In 1997, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, Santa Clara County, and the County's 13 cities produced an Urban Runoff Management Plan that established measures to reduce runoff pollution. Implementation of the Urban Runoff Management Plan is expected to reduce substantially the volume of runoff pollutants and hazardous materials entering local watercourses. The General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address water quality issues associated with urban development. g-h. Only a very small portion of Campbell is subject to flooding, as noted on maps issues by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. No new development is planned for these areas in the General Plan Update. However, the General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address areas subject to potential flooding. Although improbable, dam failure could result from earthquake activity. Less catastrophic effects could also result from a landslide into a relatively full reservoir. Dam failure can cause injury, loss of life, and property damage due to flooding, inundation, erosion, debris and sediment deposition, disabling of infrastructure, and interruption of services. The City lies within the inundation zone for several dams, as shown in Table 3. Failure of one or more of these dams could adversely affect the City as water spreads out over the valley floor, and with the static pressure on structures from standing water once flow subsides. However, the Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address areas subject to potential flooding. Table 3: Dam Failure Hazazds Dam Size .Owner Waterway Hooded Austrian Dam 6,200 acre feet San Jose Water Works Los Gatos Creek Lexington Dam 21,430 acre feet Santa Clara Valley Water District Los Gatos Creek Rinconada Dam 46 acre feet Santa Claza Valley Water District Rinconada Creek Stevens Creek 4,000 acre feet Santa Clara Valley Water District Stevens Creek Vasona Dam 660 acre feet Santa Clara Valley Water District Vasona Creek Source: City of Campbell Emergency Plan, revised 1997. The City of Campbell is not an area subject to the threat of tsunami, seiches, or mudflow. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding hydrology and water quality. IS-23 City of Campbell General Plan Update IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless Leas than Signficant Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact a. Physically divide an established community? ^ a b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation ~ a of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ^ ^ ^ natural community conservation plan? Documentation: Future development under the General Plan Update would result in infill development within an existing urban environment. Therefore, it would unite, rather than divide, urban development throughout the City. b. The General Plan Update represents the City's current vision regarding physical growth and development, provision of public services and facilities, and conservation and enhancement of natural resources. Although the community vision and goals for the City have not changed substantially since the adoption of the current General Plan or even its first General Plan in 1960, some fine-tuning must be made to reflect current population, community conditions and State requirements. The General Plan Update was prepared using a number of City and regional plans as a framework. As such, the Update would not conflict with any adopted plan, policy or regulation that applies to the environment in the City of Campbell. There are no known conflicts with habitat conservation plans or policies adopted by agencies for the area that includes the City of Campbell and, therefore, no impact would occur. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding land use and planning. IS-24 Initial Study Potentially X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Significant Significant Unless Less than Significant Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ^ ^ resource that would be of value in the region and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Documentation: a-b. The City of Campbell is not a source of mineral resources that are of value to the region or the State. No areas of the City are used for the mining and/or processing of such resources. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding mineral resources. IS-25 City of Campbell General Plan Update Xi. NOISE. Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Potentially Signfficant Unless less than Significant a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ^ groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels ^ in the project vidnity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vidnity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ^ ^ the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Documentation: a. Noise is commonly defined as a sound or series of sounds that are irritating, intrusive and disruptive to daily activities. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm, or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise sources occur in two forms: point sources, such as stationary mechanical equipment, a water reclamation plant, or individual motor vehicles; and line sources, such as roadways with large numbers of point sources (motor vehicles). Noise impacts on the existing and future land uses within the City would primarily occur as a result of traffic volumes on the adjacent and nearby roadways. The future contours for many of the roadways within the City are identified in Table 4. These noise levels are presented in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). CNEL is an average A-weighted sound level measured over a 24hour time period. However, this noise scale is adjusted to account for some individuals' increased sensitivity to noise levels during the evening and nighttime hours. A CNEL noise measurement is obtained after adding five decibels to sound levels occurring during the evening from 7 P.M. to 10 P.M., and 10 decibels to sound levels occurring during the nighttime from 10 P.M. to 7 A.M. The five and ten decibel penalties are applied to account for peoples' increased sensitivity during the evening and nighttime hours. For example, the logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dB(A) 24hour linear average would result in a CNEL measurement of 66.7 dB(A). Goals, policies, and strategies provided in the Conservation and Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Update address existing noise issues and ways of reducing noise generation associated with new development and redevelopment, which produce both short- term impacts during construction and long-term operational impacts, such as traffic. A primary way of reducing the potential for noise impacts is to ensure separation between noise-sensitive uses, such as residences, schools and churches, and noise generators, such as IS-26 Initial Study manufacturing businesses and major transportation corridors. However, as such incompatibilities already exist and may be anticipated to continue to occur under existing zoning, measures should be taken to mirLmi~e noise impacts. These include site planning, design, and construction methods that absorb or deflect sound. b, d. Groundborne vibration and/or noise levels may be generated by construction activities during buildout of the General Plan Update. Any such sources would not be any different than what would be used of buildout under the existing General Plan. Therefore no new impacts would occur. c. As discussed previously, the General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in an increase of approximately 99 more residential units and a decrease of approximately one million square feet of commercial and industrial uses from those amounts planned for in the existing General Plan. The overall effect would be less city-wide traffic generation. There would, however, be some changes in traffic distribution associated with the proposed changes to the land use plan. The differences in noise levels between the existing General Plan and proposed General Plan Update are presented in Table 5. As shown, future noise levels under the General Plan Update would be equal to or less than those under the existing General Plan. e-f. Noise levels associated with aircraft overflight are principally related to primary San Jose International Airport and San Francisco International Airport paths. These noise levels are addressed in the Master Plan of each airport. Both Master Plans also show noise level contour zones extending north and south at the end of each runway. During inclement weather, the San Jose and San Francisco airport flight patterns are shifted over Campbell and increase the amount of aircraft overflight noise. The airport Master Plans propose to change flight patterns to increase the frequency of overflight in the City. The City will advocate reducing the amount of overflight. The City of Campbell is not located within the noise contours of any other public airport or any private airstrip. IS-27 ` City of Campbell General Plan Update Table 4: General Plan Update Noise Contours ~ZOADWAY _ ~ ~~ ~ '~ ~ -"'~ CNEL at Noise LevelContour~ Seg~zlent .. 75 Feet 75 CNBL 70 CNEL b5 CNEL 60 CNEL HIGHWAY 17 north City limit to south limit 83.9 234 498 1,069 2,302 SAN TOMAS EXPRESSWAY Hamilton to Campbell 72.2 - 98 196 415 Campbell to Bud 73.1 - 109 221 471 west of Highway 17 72.6 - 103 208 441 HAMILTON AVENUE Phoenix to Leigh 69.9 - - 144 304 BASCOM AVENUE Southwest Expressway to Apricot 68.9 - - 123 255 CAMPBELL AVENUE San Tomas Aquino to Bascom 63.8 - - - 131 SAN TOMAS AQUINO Latimer to Pollard 60.4 - - - 79 HACIENDA AVENUE west City limit to Dell 61.7 - - - 98 WEST PARR AVENUE Pollard to Winchester 54.4 - - - - WHITE OAKS ROAD Camden to Bascom 55.5 - - - - MCGLWCEY LANE Union to Curtner 56.6 - - - - MANCHESTER AVENUE Hamilton to Ridgeley 46.6 - - - - POLLARD ROAD San Tomas Aquino to West Parr 62.4 - - - 105 MCCOY AVENUE Meta to Harriet 56.5 - - - - VIRGINIA AVENUE Campbell to Chapman 53.7 - - - - CENTRAL AVENUE Downing to Orchard City 54.2 - - - - WINCHESTER BOULEVARD Hamilton to Division 66.4 -- - 91 191 STATE ROUTE 85 over Pollard 83.1 197 413 884 1,902 Source: Impact Sciences, Inc. Calculations are provided in Appendix A. -Noise contour is located within 75 feet of the roadway centerline. ~ Distance is in feet from center of roadway and is applicable to botch sides of the roadway. IS-28 Initial Study Table 5: Changes in City-Wide Noise Levels . ~ N©ise Level in c1B(A) CNEL at 75 Feet1 ROADWAY Existing General Plan Change in :Segment General Plan Update Noise HIGHWAY 17 north City limit to south limit 83.9 83.9 0.0 SAN TOMAS EXPRESSWAY Hamilton to Campbell 72.3 72.2 -0.1 Campbell to Bud 73.2 73.1 -0.1 west of Highway 17 72.8 72.6 -0.2 HAMILTON AVENUE Phoenix to Leigh 69.9 69.9 0.0 BASCOM AVENUE Southwest Expressway to Apricot 69.0 68.9 -0.1 CAMPBELL AVENUE San Tomas Aquino to Bascom 64.1 63.8 -0.3 SAN TOMAS AQUINO Latimer to Pollard 60.6 60.4 -0.2 HACIENDA AVENUE west City limit to Dell 61.7 61.7 0.0 WEST PARR AVENUE Pollard to Winchester 54.7 54.4 -0.3 WHITE OAKS ROAD Camden to Bascom 56.2 55.5 -0.7 MCGINCEY LANE Union to Curtner 56.7 56.6 -0.1 MANCHESTER AVENUE Hamilton to Ridgeley 46.6 46.6 0.0 POLLARD ROAD San Tomas Aquino to West Parr 62.4 62.4 0.0 MCCOY AVENUE Meta to Harriet 56.7 56.5 -0.2 VIRGINIA AVENUE Campbell to Chapman 53.9 53.7 -0.2 CENTRAL AVENUE Downing to Orchard City 54.2 54.2 0.0 WINCHESTER BOULEVARD Hamilton to Division 66.4 66.4 0.0 STATE ROUTE 85 over Pollard 83.1 83.1 0.0 Source: Impact Sciences, Inc. Calculations are provided in Appendix A. -Noise contour is located within 75 feet of the roadway centerline. ~ Distance is in feet from center of roadway and is applicable to botch sides of the roadway. IS-29 City of Campbell General Plan Update There would be no increase in the amount of aircraft overflight noise associated with the proposed land use changes. The Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address the noise levels associated with aircraft overflights. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding noise. IS-30 Initial Study Potentially XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Significant Less than Significant Unless Significant a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either Impact ~ Mitigated ^ Impact No Impact directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Documentation: a-c. No changes to the existing Housing Element of the General Plan are proposed at this time. The land use plan that is being updated at this time would, however, provide for an increase of 99 residential units above that allowed under the existing General Plan. The population projections utilized in the development of the General Plan Update are consistent with the projections developed by the Association of Bay Area Governments. Some existing housing units may be removed during buildout under the General Plan Update, but they would be replaced at a greater level than under the existing General Plan. Therefore, the General Plan Update would not significantly impacts population and or housing levels within the city or region. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding population and housing. IS-31 City of Campbell General Plan Update XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless Less than Significant Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact ^ ^ ® ^ Documentation: a. Development under the General Plan Update has the potential to increase the demand for public service. The increased demand would not, however, be considered significant as discussed below. Fire Protection Since 1993, the City has contracted with Santa Clara County for fire and emergency medical services. The County Fire Department operates two stations and a training facility in Campbell, with 20 of its 275 personnel in the City. The distance between these stations and most of the City is less than 1.5 miles, the optimum maximum distance for emergency response. In addition to fire protection, the Department undertakes fire prevention and public education programs, including earthquake preparedness, CPR training and first aid. The Department responds to vehicle accidents and calls for rescue and hazardous materials incidents. All engine companies provide first-response medical attention, attempting to achieve response times of five minutes or less. The Department also offers hazardous material and premises inspections for businesses. The City also benefits from the depth of resources available through County Fire Department's regional system. The City presents a wide range of fire risks, including high-rise structures, multi-story apartment buildings, and hazardous materials storage and use. Still, fires comprise an increasingly smaller portion of Department workload (only about 6%), as older buildings are replaced with newer, more fire-resistant structures. Fires in grass/brush azeas and single family homes together account for about one-quarter of fire responses. Vehicle fires aze the most common fire type, but emergency medical aid, including at traffic accidents, comprises the majority of Department calls. The City helps to mirLm»e fire hazards by regulating building construction and site planning through the implementation of the Zoning Ordinance, the California Fire Code, and the California Building Code. Many new businesses and residences have been equipped with fire sprinklers and detection systems. Annual inspections by the Fire District and the City help ensure compliance with fire protection standards. The Health and Safety Element of the IS-32 Initial Study General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address fire and emergency medical services and fire safety. Police Protection The Campbell Police Department operates from the Main Police Facility at City Hall. The Police Department also has a Neighborhood Police Center that is used for a public information center and drop-in point for on-duty police officers. The Department conducts a variety of policing and education programs, in addition to providing law enforcement, patrol and investigation services. In the case of a large-scale emergency, the Department abides by the terms of a mutual aid agreement with surrounding communities to shaze police resources. The Police Department employs 46 officers and 17 administrative employees. The Department maintains performance standards for response times, attempting to arrive at emergency scenes within five minutes of dispatch 95 percent of the time, and at non- emergency scenes within 20 minutes of dispatch 90 percent of the time. Property-related incidents (the majority of reported crime in Campbell) aze expected to increase as population grows, as are vandalism and general gang activity. Locally high traffic volumes are anticipated to continue to produce frequent citations and accidents. The Police Department runs the Neighborhood Watch law enforcement program. In addition, officers that are not responding to service calls patrol Special Enforcement Areas to address specific community problems. The Department runs a Drug Resistance Education Program (DARE) at local elementary schools, and additional programs for at-risk youth have been implemented. Officers spend increasingly more time making contact with the public in shopping centers, parks and neighborhoods not only to enhance enforcement, but also to engage in proactive information shazing. The Department employs current communication and information technologies and operates modern, well-maintained vehicles and equipment. A number of capital improvements are proposed in the next five years to help increase efficiency, including extensive remodeling of facilities. The Health and Safety Element of the General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address police facilities and personnel. Schools Three school districts operate in Campbell: the Campbell Union School District, the Moreland Elementary School District, and the Campbell Union High School District. The Campbell Union School District operates nine elementary, three middle schools, and a charter school. The District encompasses Campbell, Los Gatos, Santa Clara, Monte Sereno, San Jose, and portions of unincorporated Santa Clara County. The District also maintains Dover School in Campbell, which is leased to three private schools. In 1998, 5,033 students attended the elementary schools, and 2,874 students went to the middle schools. School District attendance is expected to exceed capacity by 2001. The Moreland Elementary School District maintains seven elementary and two middle schools. There are currently 4,632 students attending schools in the District, the attendance of which is expected to exceed capacity by 2003. The Campbell Union High School District operates five high schools (Branham, Del Mar, Leigh, Prospect, and Westmont) and one alternative education high school (Blackford). The IS-33 City of Campbell General Plan Update District serves Campbell, San Jose, Los Gatos, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and unincorporated portions of Santa Clara County. As of October 1999, there were 7,394 students in the Campbell Union High School District. Development under the General Plan Update would increase the number of students attending local schools since 99 residential units could be constructed over the amount planned for in the current General Plan. The Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that address public schools. Included in these is the requirement for developers to pay the State-mandafied school impact fees to the appropriate districts. Under Government Code section 65995, the payment of the mitigation fees collected by the local school districts would reduce the direct and cumulative impacts of development to less than significant levels. Parks Campbell currently contains over 245 total acres of usable open space, which includes City- owned parks and special facilities, County-owned parks and trails, Campbell Unified School District facilities, one Santa Clara Valley Water District groundwater recharge facility that is improved and open to the public, and one private open space area that was given a credit towards the City's park impact fee and dedication requirement. Each of these uses is discussed in detail in the Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update. Development under the General Plan Update would increase the number of residents utilizing local open space, parkland, and recreational facilities since 99 residential units could be constructed over the amount planned for in the current General Plan. The Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that address open space and parks and ensure that adequate facilities would be provided for the City's residents. Other public facilities The Campbell City Hall is located in the heart of the City. It houses all the City departments, including the Police Department. The Campbell Branch Library at the Civic Center is one of nine Santa Clara County Branch Libraries. Current circulation at the library is 12.79 books checked-out per City resident annually. The library features an on-line catalog and 24-hour phone renewal service for reading materials. Branch library facilities also include a bookmobile that stops at schools and children's centers, retirement homes, parks, and community centers. The Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that address public facilities and services and ensure that facilities and services would meet local demand. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding public services. IS-34 Initial Study Potentially XIV. RECREATION. Potentially Significant Less than Significant Unless Significant Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing ~ ^ ® ^ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Dces the project include recreational facilities or require ^ the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physigl effect on the environment? Documentation: a-b. Campbell currently contains over 245 total acres of usable open space, which includes City- owned parks and special facilities, County-owned parks and trails, Campbell Unified School District facilities, one Santa Clara Valley Water District groundwater rechazge facility that is improved and open to the public, and one private open space area that was given a credit towards the City's park impact fee and dedication requirement. Each of these uses is discussed in detail in the Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update. Development under the General Plan Update would increase the number of residents utilizing local open space, parkland, and recreational facilities since 99 residential units could be constructed over the amount planned for in the current General Plan. The Open Space, Parks and Public Facilities Element of the General Plan Update provides goals, policies, and strategies that address open space and parks and ensure that adequate facilities would be provided for the City's residents. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding recreation. IS-35 City of Campbell General Plan Update XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less than a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existin traffic load and it f th t Significant Impact ^ Unless Mitigated ^ Significant Impact No Impact g capac y o e s reet system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b. Exceed, either individually or cumuhatively, a level of seMce standard est bli h d b th ^ ^ a e s y e county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic level or h l i i ^ ~ ® ^ s a c ange n ocat on that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ^ ^ ® a (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ^ ^ ® ^ f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? ^ ^ ® ^ g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ^ ^ supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Documentation: a-b. As discussed previously, the General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. Implementation of the General Plan Update would result in an increase of approximately 99 more residential units and a decrease of approximately one million squaze feet of commercial and industrial uses from those amounts planned for in the existing General Plan. The overall effect would be less city-wide traffic generation. There would, however, be some changes in traffic distribution associated with the proposed changes to the land use plan. The differences in roadway traffic volumes between the existing General Plan and proposed General Plan Update have been calculated by the Santa Claza Valley Transportation Authority and are presented in Table 6. As shown, daily traffic volumes would only increase on two of the study area roadways. All other locations would have reduced traffic volumes. In all cases, the roadway capacities would be adequate to accommodate the identified traffic volumes with no significant impacts on their levels of service. IS-36 Initial Study Table 6: Changes in City-Wide Roadway Traffic Volumes Average Daily Traffic Volumes ROADWAY _ Existing .:Existing General Change " Segment Counts General Plan in Plan .....:Update Volume HIGHWAY 17 north City limit to south limit 152,000 164,903 165,309 +406 SAN TOMAS EXPRESSWAY Hamilton to Campbell 54,700 64,485 62,873 -1,612 Campbell to Budd 64,900 77,621 76,096 -1,525 west of Highway 17 62,900 70,969 68,780 -2,189 HAMILTON AVENUE Phoenix to Leigh 67,728 71,257 70,977 -280 BASCOM AVENUE Southwest Expressway to Apricot 54,772 54,485 54,090 -395 CAMPBELL AVENUE Sari Tomas Aquino to Bascom 15,497 20,909 19,805 -1,104 SAN TOMAS AQUINO Latimer to Pollard 5,756 9,263 8,817 -446 HACIENDA AVENUE west City limit to Dell 12,960 16,692 16,678 -14 WEST PARR AVENUE Pollard to Winchester 4,981 4,804 4,457 -347 WHTTE OAKS ROAD Camden to Bascom 2,794 4,676 4,008 -668 MCGLINCEY LANE Union to Curtner 7,538 7,513 7,325 -188 MANCHESTER AVENUE Hamilton to Ridgeley 738 738 738 0 POLLARD ROAD San Tomas Aquino to West Parr 15,513 17,963 17,942 -21 MCCOY AVENUE Meta to Harriet 4,247 5,309 5,055 -254 VIRGINIA AVENUE Campbell to Chapman 2,727 3,942 3,813 -129 CENTRAL AVENUE Downing to Orchard City 4,477 4,198 4,250 +52 WINCHESTER BOULEVARD Hamilton to Division 31,638 35,633 35,309 -324 STATE ROUTE 85 over Pollard 111,000 124,146 124,110 -36 Source: Impact Sciences, Inc. Calculations are provided in Appendix A. -Noise contour is located within 75 feet of the roadway centerline. ~ Count date ranges from 1989 to 2000. The majority of the counts are from 1998. IS-37 City of Campbell General Plan Update c. Hazards associated with aircraft overflight are principally related to the risk of accident along primary San Jose International Airport and San Francisco International Airport paths. These hazards are addressed in each of the Master Plans of each airport. Both Master Plans also show hazard zones extending north and south at the end of each runway. During inclement weather, the San Jose and San Francisco airport flight patterns are shifted over Campbell and increase the risk of aircraft accidents in the City as well as the amount of aircraft overflight noise. The airport Master Plans propose to change flight patterns to increase the frequency of overflight in the City. The City will advocate reducing the amount of overflight. This would reduce potential safety risks within the City. d. No physical changes in roadway configurations are proposed under the General Plan Update. Any new development occurring under the General plan Update would be required to comply with all City roadway and street design standards. This would ensure that there would be no increase in roadway hazards. e. The General Plan Update is consistent with the City's adopted Emergency Plan. Any new development occurring under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with all City standards for emergency access. f. No specific parking facilities are proposed under the General Plan Update. Any new development occurring under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with all City standards for on and off-street parking. g. The General Plan Update provided goals, policies, and strategies for the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and the use of transit services. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding transportation/traffic. IS-38 Initial Study XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Signfignt Unless Less than Significant a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or ^ ^ wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the constructton of new storm water ^ ^ ® ^ drainage fadlities or expansion of existing fadlities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entltlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ~ Q ® Q 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? f. Be served by a landfill with suffident permitted capacity to ' ^ ^ ® ^ accommodate the project s solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and ^ a regulations related to slid waste? Documentation: a-b, &e. The West Valley Sanitation District provides sanitary sewer collection services to approximately 110,000 persons residing in Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, and portions of the County. The District sewer collection system consists of 494 miles of pipeline, most of which lie beneath public rights-of-way. The system includes 315 miles of main and trunk sewers, and 179 miles of sewer laterals, with about 100 miles of sewer pipelines in Campbell. More than half the connections in Campbell are single-family residences, and about five percent are commercial and industrial properties. The Sanitation District contracts with the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant for wastewater treatment and disposal. Located in north San Jose, the plant treats wastewater from local municipalities and sanitation districts and discharges the treated wastewater into San Francisco Bay. The Sanitation District accounts for about 10 percent of plant treatment capacity. The District's current allocation is 13 million gallons per day. Wastewater measurement in fiscal year 1998-99 showed the District flow to the plant at 10.5 million gallons per day, of which Campbell is estimated to contribute about three million gallons per day. Because only 1,600 housing units are projected to be added at buildout, sufficient capacity exists in the collection pipeline system and wastewater treatment plant to ensure continued adequate sewerage services to Campbell for the foreseeable future. c. The City operates and maintains a storm water drainage system and coordinates with surrounding jurisdictions and Santa Clara County to provide regional storm drainage for the Santa Clara Valley. Since Campbell is almost entirely developed, there is a high amount of impermeable surface area. The drainage system consists of a series of inlets and pipes that IS-39 City of Campbell General Plan Update channel storm runoff to Los Gatos and San Tomas Aquino Creeks, which discharge into San Francisco Bay. Drainage improvements are planned by the City to enable additional development while preventing flooding. The General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address storm drainage facilities. d. The regional wholesale supplier of water to the South Bay Area is the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), which derives water from local, recycled, and imported supplies. Less than half of the District's water is supplied by local rainfall and groundwater. The rainwater is stored in den local reservoirs, and some of it is transferred to the District's Groundwater Recharge Facilities. The District owns more than 30 groundwater rechazge facilities, six of which are located in Campbell and comprise 85 acres along Los Gatos Creek. These facilities percolate both local and imported water into the groundwater aquifer. The average yearly surface flow that can be captured and diverted to reservoirs, treatment plants or the groundwater basin is about 101,000 acre-feet per yeaz; natural recharge into the groundwater basin adds another 112,000 acre-feet. During critical dry periods the surface water and groundwater amounts average only 59,000 acre-feet and 74,000 acre-feet, respectively. The District operates four water pollution control plants that develop recycled water for outdoor irrigation use. The San Jose/Santa Clara plant produces 9,000 acre-feet per year; Sunnyvale, 2,400 acre-feet; Gilroy, 2,600 acre feet; and Palo Alto 400 acre-feet. This creates a combined total of 14,400 acre-feet per year. Most of the District's imported water comes to the County from the Sierra Nevada Mountains via the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. This imported water is delivered by the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project. The Santa Clara Valley Water District Supply is shown in Table 7. A safe, reliable water supply is essential to the health and well-being of a community. Although water demand varies with the nature and intensity of land use, population continues to grow while water supply resources remain relatively constant. Therefore, it is essential to implement conservation measures to ensure an adequate water supply in the future. The SCVWD's Integrated Water Resources Plan includes measures for residential, commercial, governmental, and industrial water conservation and management. The District is also permitted to require the installation of water-saving devices, such as low-flow showerheads or ultra-low-flush toilets and to charge higher fees for higher water usage. Additional water conservation measures include high-efficiency irrigation systems, automated controllers, climate-appropriate plant materials, water efficient landscape design, ultrasonic faucets, air-cooled drinking fountains, process water recycling, cooling tower modifications, and proper landscape maintenance practices. In accordance with the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act, the City has adopted Water Efficient Landscaping Guidelines for drought-tolerant landscaping to help minimise water demand. IS-40 Initial Study Table 7: Santa Clara Valley Water District Water Supply Sources Wet Long-Term Critical ' Weather Averages Dry Weather 15uppIy Type (Acre Feet) (Acre Feet) {Acre Feet) Local Supplies Surface Water Yield Natural Groundwater Recharge Drawn Out of Local Storage Recycled Water Water Pollution Control Plans Imported Supplies State Water Project Federal Central Valley Project Totals 155,000 101,000 59,000 225,000 112,000 74,000 0 0 40,000 14,400 14,400 14,400 100,000 74,000 47,000 152,500 125,000 110,000 646,900 426,400 344,400 Source: Santa Clara Valley Water District, Integrated Water Resources Plan, January 1997. 1 Average supply between 1922-1990. If Santa Clara County enjoyed only average to wet years from now to the year 2020, current water supplies could probably meet demand. But droughts are common in California, and it is likely that one will occur during the next twenty yeazs. In future severe droughts the County could experience a water supply shortfall of up to 100,000 acre-feet, according to District projections. The District has identified strategies to meet this shortfall, including water banking, non-potable recycling, demand management, and long-term transfers. As discussed previously, the proposed General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. Therefore, the overall demand for water, both local and imported, would be reduced. The General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that encourage local participation in water conservation efforts. f-g. The City's agreements with Green Valley Disposal Company and Guadalupe Rubbish Disposal Company for the disposal of municipal solid wastes extend through 2007. Green Valley collects the City's solid wastes and delivers them to the Guadalupe Landfill in San Jose. The 115-acre landfill accepts only residential, commercial, industrial, and demolition wastes, with closure projected for 2013. When City wastes were last studied in 1991, about 39 percent came from homes, 22 percent from businesses, and 37 percent from industry. All California cities are required to reduce solid waste disposal to 50 percent of 19891evels by 2000. City waste diversion measures include source reduction, recycling, composting and yazd waste programs. Source reduction prevents creation of solid waste by diminishing the amount of a product used and/or by prolonging the useful life of a product. Diversion through source reduction may reduce landfill disposal by 20 percent. The proposed General Plan Update is less intensive than the existing General Plan. Therefore, the overall generation of solid waste would be reduced. The Conservation and IS-41 City of Campbell General Plan Update Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Update also provides goals, policies, and strategies that address waste management and recycling. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding utilities and service systems. IS-42 Initial Study Potentially XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially Significant Less than Significant Unless Signifignt Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality ^ ^ ® ^ of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Dces the project have impacts that are individually limited, ' ~ ^ ® ^ but cumulatively considerable? ( Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c. Does the project have environmental effects which will ^ ^ ® ^ cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Documentation: Based on the preceding discussion, approval and implementation of the General Plan Update does not have the potential to sigtuficantly impact the local or regional environment. The General Plan Update addresses the future (read cumulative) development potential of the City. It also addresses the future conditions of the City and the desired effects on the residents both directly and indirectly. Further Study Required: No further analysis is required regarding mandatory findings of significance. IS-43 City of Campbell General Plan Update 5. REFERENCES Barry, T.M., and J.A. Reagan. FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, December 1978. California Environmental Qualifij Act: CEQA Guidelines. Sacramento, California: Office of Planning and Research, Office of Permit Assistance, January 1, 2000. Campbell, City of, Community Development Department. City of Campbell General Plan Update. Campbell, California: City of Campbell, Public Review Draft, September 2000. Hendriks, Rudolf W. California Vehicle Noise Emissions Levels. Sacramento, California: California Department of Transportation, January 1987. Jue, Matthew. City of Campbell Public Works Department, Campbell, California. Correspondence to Impact Sciences, Inc., September 20, 2000. IS-44