HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.3 Casamira/Moller Attch 1
l t)2~1
RESOLUTION NO. XX-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
***********************************************
CERTIFYING A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND
ADOPTING MITIGATION FINDINGS, FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES, A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CASAMIRA VALLEY/MOLLER
RANCH PROJECT AND THE TIPPER PROPERTY, LOCATED AT 6861 AND 7440
TASSAJARA ROAD (APNs 985-0001-001 and 986-0004-001)
P A 03-060
WHEREAS, the approximately 238.8 acre Casamira Valley/Moller Ranch ("Casamira Valley")
and Tipper Project proposes to annex two properties to the City of Dublin and the Dublin San Ramon
Services District. The Project site contains the approximately 226.3-acre Casamira Valley site on the east
side of Tassajara Road, and the 12.5 acre Tipper parcel on the west side of Tassajara Road, both south of
the Alameda/Contra Costa County line. The Project site is proposed for prezoning to the PD-Planned
Development Zoning District with a related Stage 1 Development Plan as further described below; and
WHEREAS, The DeSilva Group submitted applications for a General Plan and Specific Plan
Amendment, PD prezoning and annexation for future development of approximately 209 residences, a
Neighborhood Square, and open space on the approximately 226.3 acre Casamira Valley site; and
WHEREAS, On May 21, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution 32-06, authorizing the
initiation of a study to increase change the land use designations on the Casamira Valley site; and
WHEREAS, the Stage 1 Development Plan for Casamira Valley was subsequently revised to
increase the number of proposed dwellings from 209 to 298, including attached and detached units, and
located generally in the same development area as originally proposed. The Project includes a looped
internal road with two access points to Tassajara Road. A portion of the roadway, as well as some project
grading and water quality and detention ponds would extend offsite onto approximately 7 acres of land
owned by Casamira Valley and located in Contra Costa County; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the annexations, the application requests to: amend the General Plan on
the Casamira Valley site to change the land use designation for the development area from Low Density
Residential to Medium Density Residential to allow for increased density and attached housing; to amend
the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to include the 226.3-acre site; to prezone the site to PD-Planned
Development and adopt a related Stage 1 Development Plan reflecting the proposed development; and to
approve a Pre-Annexation Agreement. The revised Project also includes a voluntary conservation easement
for the portions of the Casamira Valley site where no development is proposed and includes future
cancellation and rescission of the Williamson Act contract on the proposed development area pursuant to
Government Code section 51256. (See Stage 1 Development Plan, September and December 2006
revisions.) No development is proposed on the Tipper site. The annexations for the Casamira Valley and
Tipper properties and other applications are collectively known as the "Project" and are on file and
available for review during normal business hours as P A 03-060 at the Planning Division, Dublin City
Hall, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568; and
Attachment 1
blt(,7-Q7
WHEREAS, the Project site is in Eastern Dublin for which the City adopted the Eastern Dublin
General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan to provide a comprehensive planning framework for future
development of the area. In connection with this approval, the City certified a program EIR pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15168 (SCH: 91103064, Resolution 51-93, and Addendum dated August 22,
1994, hereafter "Eastern Dublin EIR" or "program EIR") that is available for review in the Planning
Department and is incorporated herein by reference. The program EIR was integral to the planning
process and examined the direct and indirect effects, cumulative impacts, broad policy alternatives, and
areawide mitigation measures for developing Eastern Dublin, including the Project site; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR identified potentially significant environmental impacts and
related mitigation measures, which the City adopted together with mitigation findings and a Mitigation
Monitoring Program (Resolution 53-93, incorporated herein by reference), which mitigation measures and
monitoring program continue to apply to development in Eastern Dublin, including the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Eastern Dublin EIR also identified potentially significant environmental impacts
that could not be avoided by mitigation and for which the City adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared an Initial Study dated May 2005 for the Project consistent with
CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163 and determined that a supplement to the Eastern Dublin EIR
was required in order to analyze substantial changes in circumstances and new information that could
result in new or potentially more severe significant impacts than identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR; and
WHEREAS, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation dated May 28, 2005 with the Initial
Study to public agencies and interested parties for consultation on the scope of the supplemental
EIR. The City also conducted a public scoping meeting on June 17,2005; and
WHEREAS, based on the Initial Study and responses to the Notice of Preparation, the City
prepared a Draft Supplemental EIR dated October 2006 (SCH No. 2005052146) which reflected the
independent judgment of the City as to the potential environmental effects of the Project. The Draft
Supplemental EIR confirmed that many aspects of the Project were within the scope ofthe Eastern Dublin
program and that the certified Eastern Dublin EIR adequately described these aspects of the Project for
CEQA purposes. The Draft Supplemental EIR was circulated for the required 45 day public review
period, from October 30,2006 to December 13, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the City received comment letters from State and local agencies during the public
review period. The City prepared a Final Supplemental EIR dated March 2007 containing written
responses to all comments received during the public review period, which responses provide the City's
good faith, reasoned analysis of the environmental issues raised by the comments; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Supplemental EIR analyzed the Project as originally proposed. However,
the potential for Project revisions was anticipated and is reflected in Alternative 4 - Medium Density
Attached and Detached Housing Development, which analyzed a project of up to 326 dwelling units in
generally the same development area as originally proposed. The analysis determined that Alternative 4
would have no new or greater significant impacts, and would require no new or different mitigation
measures than those identified for the Project. This determination was based primarily on the same general
development area for the Project and Alternative 4, and the lesser density assumptions per dwelling unit
even though more units would be developed under the alternative; and
WHEREAS, the Final Supplemental EIR describes the Project revisions, which are similar to and
2
~~ 2 '17
slightly less than the density and development assumptions analyzed in Alternative 4 of the Draft
Supplemental EIR. The Final Supplemental EIR specifically reviewed the Project revisions and determined
that they are similar to and no greater than the impacts identified for Alternative 4 in the Draft Supplemental
EIR;and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated April 10, 2007, and incorporated herein by reference, described
and analyzed the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs and the Project for the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Staff Report, and the Draft and Final
Supplemental EIRs at a noticed public hearing on April 10, 2007, at which time all interested parties had
the opportunity to be heard. Following the hearing and based on the record before it, the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution 07-12 recommending certification of the Supplemental EIR and
Resolutions 07-14,07-15, and 07-16 recommending approval ofthe Project, both of which resolutions are
incorporated herein by reference and available for review at the Planning Division in City Hall at 100
Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated May 1, 2007, and incorporated herein by reference, described
the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs and the Project for the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Staff Report, and the Draft and Final Supplemental
EIRs at a noticed public hearing on May 1,2007, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity
to be heard.
WHEREAS, the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs reflect the City's independent judgment and
analysis on the potential for environmental impacts and constitute the Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report for the Casamira Valley/Moller Ranch Project (including the Tipper property); and
WHEREAS, the Project would have significant supplemental effects on the environment, most of
which can be substantially reduced through supplemental mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the
Project must include mitigation findings as set forth in attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, some of the significant effects cannot be lessened to a level of less than significant;
therefore, approval of the Project must include findings regarding alternatives as set forth in attached
Exhibit B, and must include a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit C;
and
WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by CEQA, is contained
in attached Exhibit D; and
WHEREAS, the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs are separately bound documents,
incorporated herein by reference, and are available for review during normal business hours in the City
Planning Division, file P A 03-060. The custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute
the record of proceedings for the Casamira Valley Project is the Planning Division, City of Dublin
Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, attn: Erica Fraser.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a
part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council certifies the following:
3
41J z~7
A The Supplemental EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and
the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines.
B. The Supplemental EIR and the Eastern Dublin EIR were presented to the City Council who
reviewed and considered the information contained therein prior to approving the Project.
C. The Supplemental EIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for
environmental effects of the Casamira Valley Project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council adopts the Findings concerning significant
impacts and mitigations set forth in Exhibit A, the Findings regarding Alternatives set forth in Exhibit B, the
Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit C, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program set forth in Exhibit D and are incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1 st day of May 2007 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
G:\P A#\2003\03-060 Moller Ranch\CC May 1 \CC Reso EIR.DOC
4
EXHIBIT A
?'1J 2-'11
FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15163(e),
the City Council hereby makes the following findings with respect to the potential for significant
supplemental environmental impacts from the Casamira Valley/Moller Ranch project (hereafter
"Casamira V alley"), P A 03-060 for the Casamira Valley and Tipper properties, and means for mitigating
those impacts. Many of the impacts and mitigation measures in the following findings are summarized
rather than set forth in full. The text of the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs (SEIRs) should be
consulted for a complete description of the impacts and mitigations. Findings pursuant to section
21081 (c) relating to Proj ect alternatives are made in Exhibit B.
Supplemental Impact TRA-la; Project contribution to impact to Dublinillougherty intersection.
(DSEIRp.48.)
SM-TRA-la.
a) Improvements at the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection are included in the Eastern Dublin
Traffic Impact Fee (TIP) program. The project is required to make its fair share payment of impact fees
for these improvements. (DSEIR p. 48.)
b) The project developer shall advance to the City applicable monies for acquisition of right-of-way and
construction of the improvements assumed in this study for the intersection of Dublin
Boulevard/Dougherty Road. The amount of money advanced to the City shall be based on the
developer's fair share of the deficit (spread over those projects that are required to make up the deficit)
between funds available to the City from Category 2 Eastern Dublin TIP funds and the estimated cost of
acquiring the right-of-way and constructing the improvements. The City will provide credit for Category
2 Eastern Dublin TIP to the developer for any advance of monies made for the improvements planned for
the Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection. (DSEIR p. 49.)
Finding. Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project. However, even
with these changes, the impact might not be avoided or substantially lessened; therefore, a Statement of
Overriding Consideration must be adopted upon approval of the Project. Specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives identified in the supplemental
environmental impact report.
Rationale for Finding. Mitigation measures for roadway improvements were adopted with the Eastern
Dublin EIR and are further refined above. No supplemental measures are available to further reduce these
impacts, therefore the supplemental impact remains significant and unavoidable
Supplemental Impact TRA-lb; Project contribution to impact to Santa Rita/I-580 E/B
ramp/Pimlico Drive intersection. (DSEIR p. 49.)
SM- TRA-l b. The Project developer shall contribute a pro-rata share ofthe cost to improve the Santa Rita
Road/I-580 east bound ramp/Pimlico Drive intersection to include a third left-turn lane for the eastbound
approach and related downstream improvements as identified by Dublin Public Works Department.
Alternatively, the Project Developer shall contribute a fair share ofthe cost to install the above
improvements by payment ofthe Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee, if the Traffic Impact Fee is updated
to include the above intersection improvements prior to the time building permits are issued for the
Project. (DSEIR p. 49, FSEIR pp. 7-8.)
1
Exhibit A
F. dO Ch I. h b . d.. d . h p. h .d /.po/; 2f17
m mg. anges or a teratlOns ave een reqUIre m, or mcorporate mto, t e roJect t at aVOl or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The identified intersection and downstream improvements will improve operations
and provide more efficient capacity to accommodate Project and buildout traffic.
Supplemental Impact TRA-2; Project contribution to Tassajara Road traffic. (DSEIR p. 52, FSEIR
p.7.)
SM-TRA-2.
a) The Project developer shall construct the widening of Tassajara Road between Fallon Road and
the City/County line to four lanes and shall dedicate additional property as determined by the
Dublin City Engineer. (DSEIR p. 52, FSEIR p. 7.)
b) The Fallon Crossings developers are required to widen the segment of Tassajara Road between
Northern Access for Dublin Ranch West and Fallon Road from two lanes to four lanes. Because
the Casamira Valley Project would contribute to the projected ADT on this segment, the Casamira
Valley Project shall construct this widening in the event that this Project is developed prior to the
Fallon Crossings project. (DSEIR p. 52.)
c) The Dublin Ranch West developers are required to widen the segment of Tassajara Road between
North Dublin Ranch Drive and Northern Access for Dublin Ranch West from two lanes to four
lanes. Because the Casamira Valley Project would contribute to the projected ADT on this
segment, the Casamira Valley Project shall construct this widening in the event that this Project is
developed prior to the Dublin Ranch West project. (DSEIR p. 52.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. Widening Tassajara Road provides sufficient roadway to accommodate Project
and buildout traffic.
Supplemental Impact TRA-3; Cumulative impacts to local freeways. (DSEIR p. 53.)
SM-TRA-3. No feasible supplemental mitigation measures are identified in the SEIR.
Finding. Even with mitigations adopted through the Eastern Dublin EIR, cumulative buildout impacts on
1-580 and 1-680 will not be avoided or substantially lessened, and no feasible mitigations are identified in
the SEIR; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted upon approval of the
. Project. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the
project alternatives identified in the FSEIR.
Rationale for Finding. Mitigation measures for roadway improvements were adopted with the Eastern
Dublin EIR. The Project is required to implement all applicable mitigations from the prior approvals,
including fair share payments for cumulative impacts as further described in the DSEIR. No
supplemental measures are available to further reduce these impacts, therefore the supplemental impact
remains significant and unavoidable
2
Supplemental Impact SD-l. Changed non-point surface water quality standards. (DSEIR p. 767m 'L q '7
SM-SD-l. A water quality source control plan consistent with requirements of the Regional Water
Quality Control Board shall be prepared and approved by the City of Dublin Public Works Department
prior to issuance of a grading permit for any property within the Project area. (DSEIR p. 77.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that project site and drainage plans will design
and implement stormwater treatment measures to maintain applicable water quality permitting standards.
Supplemental Impact SD-2. Changed non-point surface water quality hydromodification
standards. (DSEIR p. 77.)
SM-SD-2. Development within the Project area shall comply with the hydromodification provisions of
the Alameda County Clean Water Program as approved by the RWQCB and administered by the City of
Dublin. Ifno Alameda County Clean Water Program permit has been adopted at the time individual
development proposals are approved by the City, applicant(s) may be required to submit hydrology and
hydrologic analyses to the City of Dublin Public Works Department to identify specific increases in storm
water runoff into downstream receiving waters and measures for ensuring that the amount and rate of
downstream runoff does not increase over current, pre-project conditions. Such reports will be reviewed
and approved by both the City of Dublin and Zone 7 Water Agency. Development projects will also be
required to pay any storm drainage fees in effect at the time of development. (DSEIR p. 77.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that Project runoff will be controlled through site
design to avoid increasing runoff compared to pre-project conditions.
Supplemental Impact BIO-l. Impacts to habitat. (DSEIR p. 100.)
SM-BIO-la. Project applicants shall preserve lands at a ratio of3:1 (preserved:impacted) as mitigation
for the proposed development. All lands proposed as mitigation must provide suitable habitat for listed
species impacted by the proposed Project. A conservation easement or similar mechanism shall be placed
on the mitigation lands to preserve the lands in perpetuity as a natural open space and habitat for native
plants and animals. An agreement establishing the conservation easement or similar mechanism on the
mitigation lands must be completed prior to the initiation of construction activities. (DSEIR p. 100.)
SM-BIO-l b. Project applicants shall establish an endowment in an amount to be determined by the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, for the long-term management, maintenance, and monitoring ofthe mitigation lands
placed in the conservation easement or similar mechanism. Project applicants shall provide a guarantee of
the endowment to the City prior to the issuance of a grading permit. (DSEIR p. 100.)
SM-BIO-lc. Project applicants shall prepare and implement a comprehensive habitat mitigation and
monitoring plan. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City, USFWS, and CDFG. The
comprehensive plan shall be approved prior to issuance of a grading permit. The mitigation and
monitoring plan shall incorporate detailed information on the management, maintenance, and monitoring
ofthe following resources impacted by the proposed project including:
3
a) Wetlands and other waters;
b) Rare plants (Congdon's tarplant and San Joaquin Spearscale);
c) CTS breeding and terrestrial habitat;
d) CRLF breeding and dispersal habitat;
e) Burrowing owl habitat;
f) San Joaquin kit fox dispersal and foraging habitat by including kit fox protection
measures adopted by the City of Dublin for Eastern Dublin properties; and
g) Wildlife corridors for CTS and CRLF.
(DSEIR pp. 100-101.)
1>'1J ~~l
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures insure that any lost habitat will be replaced and that
damaged habitat will be repaired, with the replaced or repaired habitat permanently preserved and
protected.
Supplemental Impact BIO-2. Impacts to Congdon's Tarplant. (DSEIR p. 101.)
SM-BIO-2a. Project applicants shall develop and implement a salvage and recovery plan, and a preserve
management plan for Congdon's tarplant. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City and
CDFG. The salvage plan shall be implemented prior to issuance of a grading permit. The plans shall be
prepared by a qualified botanist or restoration specialist experienced in the development and
implementation of native plant restoration, mitigation, and management plans. The plans, at a minimum,
shall incorporate the following.
a) Salvage and/or recovery requirements, including clearly defined goals focusing on vegetation
establishment (stability, succession, reproduction) and non-native species control measures;
b) Locations and procedures for restoration/replanting of salvaged materials or seeds;
c) Minimum replacement ratio of 1 : 1 for individual plants;
d) Specification of a five-year post-construction maintenance and monitoring program by a qualified
restoration team to ensure that the project goals and performance standards are met. The monitoring
program shall include provision for remedial action as needed to correct deficiencies;
e) Annual reports and a final report, prepared by the applicant and subject to approval by the City
and the CDFG, shall document the success of the revegetation. If the revegetation is not successful, an
additional period of correction and monitoring shall be specified; and
f) Maintenance requirement and the responsibility for implementation.
(DSEIR pp. 101-102.)
SM-BIO-2b. The Congdon's tarplant populations in the preserved mitigation lands will be protected (or
similar mechanism) and managed in perpetuity through the establishment of conservation easement or
similar mechanism and endowment. Congdon's tarplant mitigation may be accomplished on the same
parcels where mitigation for CTS and other species occurs provided that 1) the mitigation site is
determined to be suitable for all of these species and 2) the management plan includes measures for
conservation and enhancement of Congdon's tarplant. (DSEIR p. 102.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures provide permanently protected replacement habitat for
lost tarplant.
4
Q'1JZ4l
Supplemental Impact BIO-3. Impact to biological resources in unsurveyed areas. (DSEIR p. 102.)
SM-BIO-3. Prior to construction in the unsurveyed area north ofthe county line and on the Tipper
property, a qualified botanist shall conduct a reconnaissance-level survey to assess the suitability ofthe
habitats to support the special-status plants in Table 4.6.2. If suitable habitat is present for any species,
focused protocol-level surveys for those species shall be conducted. If special-status plants are present,
measures shall be implemented to avoid or lessen impacts to these species or their habitat. These
measures include redesigning the project to avoid the plants, installing fencing around the plant
populations to protect them during construction, and implementing Best Management Practices near
creeks, drainages or wetlands. If avoidance of the impact is not feasible, then a salvage and recovery
program, or equivalent, that is developed in consultation with the City and CDFG shall be implemented as
described in SM-BIO-2. Necessary consultation shall also be undertaken with regulatory agencies and
Contra Costa County. (DSEIR p. 102.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that biological resources will be surveyed before
development plans are approved such that any discovered resources can be avoided through site planning
or other appropriate protective measures; or through other identified measures if avoidance is not feasible.
Supplemental Impact BIO-4. Impacts to CTS (California Tiger Salamander) habitat. (DSEIR p.
103.)
SM-BIO-4a. The Project applicants shall preserve in perpetuity an off-site area as mitigation for impacts
to CTS and its terrestrial and breeding habitat. A minimum mitigation ratio of3:l (preserved:impacted)
shall be applied to the acreage of upland (terrestrial) CTS habitat impacted by development (150 acres).
Therefore, the mitigation area shall include a minimum of 450 acres of suitable upland habitat for CTS.
Breeding habitat also shall be mitigated at a ratio of3:1, for a total of 4.5 acres of breeding habitat.
Mitigation for breeding habitat shall include preservation of suitable CTS breeding habitat at a ratio of 1 : 1
(1.5 acres) and creation of additional breeding habitat at a ratio of2:1 (3.0 acres). (DSEIR p. 104.)
SM-BIO-4b. A conservation easement or equivalent shall be placed on all mitigation lands establishing
the lands as wildlife habitat in perpetuity. The conservation easement or equivalent shall be completed
prior to the initiation of construction activities on the project site. A comprehensive habitat management
plan shall be developed for the mitigation site that stipulates allowable activities (i.e., grazing) and details
enhancements to be completed to improve the breeding and terrestrial habitat for tiger salamanders. The
habitat management plan shall be submitted to the City, USFWS, and CDFG for review and approval.
The applicants shall provide a secure source of funding in an amount to be determined by the City and
USFWS to ensure completion of the enhancement activities on the site and to provide for its long-term
management and maintenance. (DSEIR p. 104.)
SM-BIO-4c. The applicants shall retain the services of a qualified biologist to develop a program to
capture and relocate tiger salamanders from the project site prior to the initiation of construction. The
program, including specific methods for capturing salamanders (e.g., drift fencing, pitfall traps, etc.),
location of suitable relocation sites, and timing of implementation, shall be approved by the City, USFWS
and CDFG and implemented prior to the initiation of construction. (DSEIR pp. 104-105, FSEIR p. 8)
5
L 0 tJt.. ZOz 1
SM-BIO-4d. The applicants shall develop and implement a plan to prevent salamanders from moving ~U
into the construction area during grading or construction activities and to monitor the site during
construction. This will entail the construction of a temporary exclusion fence around the grading
envelope. The plan shall be approved by the City, USFWS, and CDFG prior to the initiation of
construction activities. Implementation of this plan shall be required as a condition of approval for the
project. (DSEIRp. 105.)
SM-BIO-4e. The applicants shall erect a permanent, solid, fence to exclude salamanders from the
development area in perpetuity (Note: curbs cannot be substituted for this purpose). This amphibian
exclusion fencing shall be inspected at least two times per year (August and April) and repaired
immediately to prevent salamanders from passing through the fence and moving onto the project site. An
endowment to provide for the maintenance and repair ofthe exclusion fence shall be provided by Project
applicants in an amount to be determined by the City. The amphibian exclusion fence shall be constructed
around the north, south, and east sides of the development (no fence will be required along Tassajara
Road). The design ofthe fence shall be approved by the City, USFWS, and CDFG prior to construction
and will be shown on construction drawings. (DSEIR p. 105.)
SM-BIO-4f. Use of roden tic ides for the control of ground squirrels and/or other rodents on undeveloped,
open-space portions of the Project area and in the preserved, mitigation lands shall be prohibited. Only
rodent control methods such as trapping, or other targeted methods approved by the City shall be
permitted. (DSEIRp. 105.)
SM-BIO-4g. The applicants shall incorporate design features into the roadways that parallel Moller
Creek on the north and south to facilitate movement of salamanders and other amphibians across the road
and minimize mortality due to vehicle collisions. Roadway undercrossings will be spaced at intervals no
less than 200 feet where the roadway is bordered by potential CTS upland habitat. At least one
undercrossing shall be provided in each section of roadway that creates a barrier between CTS upland
habitat and Moller Creek. No undercrossings shall be required in front of residences. Design elements to
facilitate salamander movement across the site shall include construction of culverts under the roads and
permanent, one-way fence/ramp systems that allow CTS to exit but not enter the roadways. The City,
CDFG, and USFWS will review and approve the culvert and barrier design features prior to roadway
construction. (DSEIR p. 105.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures provide a comprehensive program for avoiding harm to
CTS by safely relocating individuals and preventing their return to the construction and development area,
by providing and managing adequate preserved and replacement habitat off-site, and by providing
qualified biologist monitoring and education during construction so that the species will be identified and
the protective measures implemented
Supplemental Impact BIO-5: Impacts to CRLF (California Red Legged Frog) habitat. (DSEIR pp.
105-106.)
SM-BIO-5a. Mitigation for loss of habitat for California tiger salamander as described in SM-BIO-4a will
also mitigate for loss of dispersal habitat for CRLF. CRLF mitigation may be accomplished on the same
areas where mitigation for California tiger salamander occurs provided that the following criteria are met:
1) the mitigation site is determined to be suitable habitat for red-legged frogs by a qualified biologist; 2)
the management plan includes measures to maintain and enhance red-legged frog habitat, 3) the site has
6
an established red-legged frog breeding pond or is located within 300 feet of a breeding site on an are; L Vb ~ q 1
preserved and managed for wildlife habitat values (e.g., regional park, mitigation site with and existing
conservation easement), and 4) the site is approved for use as a red-legged frog mitigation site by the City.
(DSEIR p. 106.)
SM-BIO-5b. Impacted aquatic habitat shall be mitigated by creating new breeding habitat at a 2:1 ratio.
A total of3.0 acres of new breeding habitat will be required to mitigate this impact. CRLF mitigation may
be accomplished on the same areas where mitigation for CTS occurs provided that 1) the mitigation site is
determined to be suitable for both of these species and 2) the management plan includes measures for
conservation and enhancement of CRLF habitat. (DSEIR p. 107.)
SM-BIO-5c. A habitat mitigation and monitoring plan shall be prepared for the CRLF mitigation site that
stipulates acceptable land uses, enhancements to be made to the habitat, and long-term maintenance and
management activities to be implemented on the site. Enhancements may include the planting of native
emergent wetland species within the deeper portions of Moller Creek and planting of native riparian
species along the banks of Moller Creek where riparian vegetation currently does not exist. The plan shall
be approved by the City, USFWS, and CDFG. (DSEIR p. 107.)
SM-BIO-5d. The Project applicant will establish an endowment in an amount to be determined by the
City, CDFG, and USFWS, for the long-term management, maintenance, and monitoring ofthe lands
placed in the conservation easement or similar mechanism as mitigation for impacts to CRLF breeding
and upland/dispersal habitat. Project applicants shall provide a guarantee of the endowment to the City
prior to the issuance of a grading permit. (DSEIR p. 107.)
SM-BIO-5e. A minimum buffer zone of 150 feet shall be maintained around CRLF aquatic habitat during
construction. No staging, parking, material storage, or ground disturbance will be allowed in the buffer
zones. The buffer zones will be clearly defined with construction fencing prior to initiation of construction
activities and will be maintained until completion ofthe Project. (DSEIR p. 107.)
SM-BIO-5f. The applicant for the Moller Ranch portion ofthe Project shall incorporate design features
for the loop road that parallels Moller Creek specified in SM-BIO-4g to facilitate amphibian movement
across the road into Moller Creek and minimize mortality due to vehicle collisions. (DSEIR p. 107.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures provide a comprehensive program for avoiding harm to
CRLF by identifying any individuals in construction areas and safely relocating them and preventing their
return to the construction and development area; by providing and managing adequate preserved and
replacement habitat; and providing construction buffer zones so that the species will be identified and
protective measures implemented during construction.
Supplemental Impact BIO-6: Impacts to burrowing owl habitat. (DSEIR pp. 107.)
SM-BIO-6a. The loss of burrowing owl habitat shall be mitigated by the preservation of approximately
450 acres of suitable grassland habitat in the natural open space in a conservation easement or similar
mechanism as designated in SM-BIO-4a. Burrowing owl mitigation may be accomplished on the same
parcels where mitigation for CTS upland habitat and/or CRLF upland habitat occurs provided that 1) the
mitigation site is determined to be suitable for all of these species and 2) the management plan includes
measures for conservation and enhancement of burrowing owl habitat. (DSEIR p. 108.)
7
I~~ 2,CJ7
SM-BIO-6b. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted for burrowing owls prior to ground disturbing
activities, including clearing and grubbing. These surveys shall conform to the survey protocol established
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium (Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Survey Guidelines
1993). Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of
construction activities and at 30-day intervals if construction activities have not been initiated in an area.
The following measures shall also be implemented:
a) Ifburrowing owls are found on the site, they shall be avoided to the extent practicable. A
clearly defined area (i.e., orange construction fencing) shall be established around each
burrowing owl burrow to be avoided. No disturbance shall occur within approximately 160
feet of occupied burrows during the non-breeding season of September 1 through January 31
or within approximately 250 feet during the breeding season of February 1 through August 31.
b) Ifburrowing owls occur on the Project site and the burrows cannot be avoided, then passive
relocation techniques may be used to relocate owls from the site during the non-breeding
season (September through January). Passive relocation includes excavating all potential
burrows after excluding owls from the burrow for the required length of time. Passive
relocation shall be done according to the current protocol established by the CDFG. The
applicant shall coordinate with CDFG prior to implementing passive relocation. Artificial
burrows shall be provided on the mitigation site for each occupied burrow destroyed on the
Project site at a ratio of2:l (two artificial burrows created for each occupied burrow
destroyed).
c) If a burrowing owl occurs on the Project site and construction is slated to begin during the
breeding season (February through August), then a buffer of a radius of250 feet (75 meters)
shall be established around any burrows containing owls. Buffer will be monitored and
maintained until owlets are capable of foraging independently.
d) Removal of burrowing owls on the Project site shall conform to the requirements ofCDFG's
Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (October 1995). (DSEIR p. 108.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measures avoid direct loss of or harm to individual owls by
providing construction buffers around occupied habitat or nests. The mitigations provide permanently
protected replacement habitat for habitat that is lost through development ofthe project.
Supplemental Impact BIO-7. Loss of habitat for nesting raptors and passerines. (DSEIR p. 109.)
SM-BIO-7. A qualified biologist shall conduct raptor and loggerhead shrike nest surveys prior to tree
pruning, tree removal, ground disturbing activities, or construction activities to locate any active nests on
or immediately adjacent to the site. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted at least 30 day prior to
construction or ground disturbing activities and at 30-day intervals until construction activities have been
initiated in an area. Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted between February 1 and August 31.
Locations of active nests shall be described and protective measures implemented. Protective measures
shall include establishment of clearly delineated (i.e., orange construction fencing) avoidance areas
around each nest site that is a minimum of 300 feet from the drip line of the nest tree or nest for raptors
and 100 feet for shrikes. The active nest sites within an exclusion zone shall be monitored on a weekly
basis throughout the nesting season to identify any signs of disturbance. These protection measures will
remain in effect until the young have left the nest and are foraging independently or the nest is no longer
active. A report will be prepared at the end of each construction season detailing the results of the
8
j ':3 tfh 7,'11
preconstruction surveys. The report will be submitted to CDFG by November 30 of each year. (DS~IW
pp. 109.)
SM-BIO-4a. See earlier description. (DSEIR p. 104.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure provides surveys and construction buffers to ensure that
active nests will not be harmed by construction activity
Supplemental Impact BIO-8. Impacts to wildlife corridors of CTS and CRLF. (DSEIR p. 109.)
SM-BIO-8. The proposed Project would result in a barrier to movement by CTS and CRLF in this region
affecting species movements to open space lands north, south, and east of the Project area. To facilitate
movement across the site and to breeding habitat within Moller Creek, the roadway design features
specified in SM-BIO-4g will be incorporated into the project to allow animals to cross the road while
avoiding traffic. (DSEIR pliO.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that design features, such as undercrossings,
culverts and other specified features are incorporated into Project roadways to facilitate wildlife
movement across roadways.
Supplemental Impact CUL-l. Impacts to unsurveyed cultural resources. (DSEIR pp. 128-9.)
SM -CUL-l. Conditions of approval shall be added on all Stage 1 and 2 Development plans to the effect
that if archeological materials or artifacts are identified, work on that portion of the project shall cease
until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Section 15064.5 is prepared by a qualified
archeologist and/or paleontologist and approved by the City of Dublin Community Development Director
or an authorized representative. Project work may be resumed in compliance with such plan. Ifhuman
remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and the provisions of State
law carried out. (DSEIR p. 129.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that if any cultural resources should be discovered
during construction, construction will cease until adequate mitigation appropriate to the resource is
identified and implemented.
Supplemental Impact CUL-2. Impacts to cultural resources on Tipper property and Contra Costa
County area. (DSEIR p. 129.)
SM-CUL-2. Prior to approval of Stage 2 Development Plans for the Tipper property and property within
Contra Costa County that would be affected by ground disturbing activities, detailed cultural resource
investigations shall be completed by qualified archeologists for these properties as approved by the
9
Dublin Community Development Director and Contra Costa County Community Development
Department ofland within Contra Costa County. (DSEIR p. 129.)
l~l,q7
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that the Tipper and County properties will be
surveyed for cultural resources before development project approval so that appropriate mitigations can
be included in the proj ects.
Supplemental Impact AQ-l. Construction impacts. (DSEIR p. 134.)
SM-AQ-1. In addition to measures identified in MM 3.11/1.0 of the East Dublin EIR, the City of Dublin
shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other
materials that can be blown by the wind.
b) Require construction contractors to sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved
access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
c) Require construction contractors to install sandbags or other erosion control measures to
prevent silt runoff to public roadways. (DSEIR p. 134.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The additional construction controls will ensure that dust and silt are prevented
from blowing or running offsite.
Supplemental Impact AQ-2. Cumulative air quality emissions. (DSEIR p. 135.)
SM-AQ-2. In addition to measures identified in MM 3.11/5.0-11.0 ofthe East Dublin EIR, the City of
Dublin shall require that the following measures, recommended in BAAQMD CEQA guidance, be
implemented if feasible:
a) The Project proponent should negotiate with LA VTA for the eventual extension of transit
service to the project site. Construct or reserve land for transit facilities such as bus
turnouts/bus bulbs, benches, etc.
b) Provide bicycle land and/or paths, connected to community-wide network.
c) Provide sidewalks and/or paths, connected to adjacent land uses, transit stops, and/or
community-wide network.
d) Consider providing shuttle service to regional transit system or multimodal center.
e) Consider providing a satellite telecommute center for project residents.
f) Provide interconnected street network, with a regular grid or similar interconnected street
pattern. (DSEIR p. 135.)
Finding. Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project. However, even
with these changes, the cumulative air quality impact will not be avoided or substantially lessened;
therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted upon approval ofthe Project.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives
identified in the supplemental environmental impact report;
10
t641...1'11
Rationale for Finding. Mitigation measures for roadway improvements were adopted with the Eastern U
Dublin EIR. These mitigations together with the above supplemental mitigation will not provide enough
emissions reduction to avoid a significant cumulative impact.
Supplemental Impact HAZ-l. Potential for exposure to asbestos-containing materials and lead-
based paints. (DSEIRp. 137.)
SM-HAZ-l. Prior to the demolition of any structures within the Project area, applicants shall undertake
comprehensive asbestos and lead based paint surveys of those structures and implement appropriate
asbestos and lead based paint handling and disposal methods based on those surveys and in compliance
with all applicable regulations. Permits and approvals shall be obtained from appropriate regulatory
agencies. If needed, worker safety plans shall be included in demolition plans. Asbestos material and lead-
based paint shall be disposed of in approved landfills. An environmental professional should be present
during demolition and pre-grading activities to inspect for any other potential contaminants. (DSEIR p.
137.)
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that any asbestos-containing materials and lead-
based paints will be identified before demolition so that applicable handling and disposal regulations, and
worker safety measures, can be implemented.
Supplemental Impact HAZ-2. Potential for soil and/or groundwater contamination and exposure
hazards from existing hazardous materials. (DSEIR p. 137.)
SM-HAZ-2. The following steps shall be taken to reduce the potential impact of release of hazardous
material into the soil or groundwater:
a) On the Moller portion of the Project area, all observed hazardous or potentially hazardous
materials shall be removed from the property by licensed waste contractors prior to grading activities. All
hazardous material on the property shall be identified and disposed of accordingly.
b) For the Tipper property and property in Contra Costa County, Phase I and, if necessary based on
the results of the Phase I analysis, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment shall be completed prior to
any demolition or grading activities being undertaken. Specific recommendations ofthe Phase I and lor
Phase II reports shall be followed as specified in each report.
Finding. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant supplemental effect identified in the SEIR.
Rationale for Finding. The mitigation measure ensures that hazardous materials will be removed from the
Moller Ranch property before project activity commences. For Tipper and the County property, the
mitigation measures ensures that hazardous materials will be identified and removed or remediated before
any project activity commences.
G:\P A#\2003\03-060 Moller Ranch\CC May 1 \exh A mitigation findings for moller ranch.DOC
11
JlP1J Zq 1
EXHIBIT B
FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
Introduction. The Eastern Dublin EIR identified four alternatives: No Project, Reduced Planning Area,
Reduced Land Use Intensities and No Development. The City Council found the No Project, Reduced
Land Use Intensities and No Development alternatives infeasible and then approved a modification ofthe
Reduced Planning Area alternative. The Supplemental EIR updates the analysis ofthe No Project
Alternative, assuming no development on the Casamira Valley/Moller Ranch (hereafter "Casamira
V alley") or Tipper sites. It also identifies and analyzes a No Project alternative to develop the Tipper site
under the existing General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and to develop the Casamira Valley site
under the existing East County Area Plan as adopted by the County in 1994. A third alternative examines
large-lot development on Casamira Valley and development ofthe Tipper property under the existing
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. Alternative 4 proposes an alternative Project with up to
326 units on the Casamira Valley site and assumes development on Tipper under the existing General
Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan. The City Council considered the four alternatives identified and
described in the Supplemental EIR and finds three of them to be infeasible for the specific economic,
social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA sections 21002 and 2108l(b)(3). The
Project objectives are identified at Section 3.5 ofthe Draft SEIR (p. 18).
The City Council is adopting a less dense version of Alternative 4 described in the Draft SEIR in place of
the originally proposed Project. The City hereby finds the remaining three alternatives identified and
described in the Supplemental EIR were considered and are found to be infeasible for the specific
economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA Section 21081 (c). The City
also declines to adopt the Project as originally proposed for the reasons set forth below.
The Originally Proposed Project. As further explained in the Final SEIR for the Project, the project
being approved by the City Council is revised from the original Project analyzed in the Draft SEIR. The
revised Project includes up to 298 dwelling units in the general development area assumed in Alternative
4, but at slightly less density than Alternative 4. The potential for revision was acknowledged in the Draft
SEIR through identification and analysis of Alternative 4 for up to 326 residences.
Section 21081 (c) does not require the City Council to make findings as to why the originally proposed
Project was not adopted. Such findings need only be made as to project alternatives which would
mitigate significant environmental effects. Alternative 4 has no significant environmental effects which
could be avoided by adopting the originally proposed project instead. Rather, the City Council finds that
Alternative 4 will pose no significant environmental effects that would not be posed at least to the same
extent by the Project as originally proposed. The analyses in the Draft and Final Supplemental EIRs
support this finding in that neither Alternative 4 in the Draft SEIR, nor the revised Project in the Final
SEIR involves new or different significant impacts than the original Project, and neither requires new or
different mitigation measures than those identified for the Project.
Alternative 1: No Project/No Development. (DSEIR pp. 144-146.)
Finding: Infeasible. Under this alternative, no development would occur on the Project site. This
alternative would avoid the revised Project's significant air quality and traffic impacts since it would
avoid the new traffic trips generated with the proposed development. This alternative would not,
however, achieve any ofthe project objectives, including implementation ofthe General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan which anticipate annexation and development of the Casamira Valley site and
annexation ofthe Tipper site. Needed housing would not be provided with this alternative.
1
Exhibit B
117J~q7
Alternative 2: No Project/Development Under Existing Eastern Dublin Area Plan (ECAP).
(DSEIR pp. 146-148.)
Finding: Infeasible. This alternative would include development of Casamira Valley under the East
County Area Plan adopted by the County in 1994. Development under the ECAP would be limited to two
dwellings on CasamiraValley, based on 100-acre minimum parcel sizes. Future development of the
Tipper property would be guided by the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan to the extent these
plans anticipate annexation and development of the site. This alternative does not avoid the revised
Project's significant air quality or traffic impacts. To the extent the Casamira Valley site would not be
developed, this alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives, such as completing the City's
corporate boundaries or implementing the development anticipated by the General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan.
Alternative 3: Large Lot Development on Casamira Valley. (DSEIR pp.148-149.)
Finding: Infeasible. This alternative would subdivide the Casamira Valley portion of the Project site into
approximately 50 one-acre residential lots with the remainder of the site in open space. Future
development of the Tipper property would be guided by the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan to the extent these plans anticipate annexation and development of the site. This alternative does not
avoid the revised Project's significant air quality or traffic impacts. The alternative would complete the
City's corporate boundaries but would provide only about one-quarter of the housing anticipated in the
Project objectives, and about 16% of the housing in the revised Project, with no potential for diverse
housing types.
G:\PA#\2003\03-060 Moller Ranch\CC May l\exh. B alternatives findings for rnollerranch.DOC
2
EXHIBIT C
/ ttVb 2'11
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1. General. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of Dublin adopted
a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR as
significant and unavoidable. (Resolution 53-93, May 10, 1993.) The City Council carefully considered
each impact in its decision to approve urbanization of Eastern Dublin through approval of the Eastern
Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan project. The City Council is currently considering the
Casamira Valley/Moller Ranch Project (hereafter "Casamira V alley"), P A 03-060. The Project proposes
annexation and prezoning of the Casamira Valley and Tipper properties, as well as a residential
development of up to 298 units on the Casamira Valley property. These actions are collectively referred
to herein as the "Project". The City prepared a Supplemental EIR for the Project which identified
supplemental impacts that could be mitigated to less than significant. The Supplemental EIR also
identified supplemental Air Quality and Traffic impacts that could not be mitigated to less than
significant. The Project being approved by the City is revised from the original Project defined in the
Draft Supplemental EIR; the revised Project proposes more units than the original Project but with a
lower density per unit. The revised Project approximates the amount and type of development identified
in Alternative 4 ofthe Supplemental EIR. The revised Project has generally the same impacts as the
original Project; no additional or modified mitigation measures are required. The same significant
unavoidable supplemental air quality and traffic impacts would remain for the revised Project, as for the
original Project.
The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with the 1993 land use approvals for
urbanization of Eastern Dublin, including both the Casamira Valley and Tipper properties. Pursuant to a
2002 court decision, the City Council must adopt new overriding considerations for the previously
identified unavoidable impacts that apply to the current Project. 1 The City Council must also adopt
overriding considerations for the supplemental impacts identified in the Supplemental EIR as significant
and unavoidable. The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects
identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the Supplemental EIR will be substantially lessened by
mitigation measures adopted with the original Eastern Dublin approvals and by the environmental
protection measures adopted through the Project approvals, to be implemented with the development of
the Project. Even with mitigation, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the Project
carries with it unavoidable adverse environmental effects as identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR and the
Project Supplemental EIR. The City Council specifically finds that to the extent that the identified
adverse or potentially adverse impacts for the project have hot been mitigated to acceptable levels, there
are specific economic, social, environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of
the proj ect.
2. Unavoidable Si2nificant Adverse Impacts from the Eastern Dublin EIR. The following
unavoidable significant environmental impacts identified in the Eastern Dublin EIR for future
development of Eastern Dublin apply to the Project.
Land Use Impact 3.1/F. Cumulative Loss of Agricultural and Open Space Lands; Visual Impacts 3.8/B;
and, Alteration of Rural/Open Space Character. Although development has occurred south ofthe project
1 ".. .public officials must still go on the record and explain specifically why they are approving the later project
despite its significant unavoidable impacts." (emphasis original.) Communities for a Better Environment v. California
Resources Aqencv 103 Cal.App. 4th 98, _ (2002).
1
EXHIBIT C
area, the site is largely undeveloped open space land. Future development ofthe Project site will l.qa.. ~ q 7
contribute to the cumulative loss of open space land. . U
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/B, 3.3/E. 1-580 Freeway, Cumulative Freeway Impacts: While city
street and interchange impacts can be mitigated through planned improvements, transportation demand
management, the 1-580 Smart Corridor program and other similar measures, mainline freeway impacts
continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR. Future development on
the Project site will still incrementally contribute to the unavoidable freeway impacts.
Traffic and Circulation Impacts 3.3/L 3.3/M. Santa Rita Road/I-580 Ramps, Cumulative Dublin
Boulevard Impacts: The Project will be required to implement all applicable adopted traffic mitigation
measures, including contributions to the City's TIF program; however even with mitigation these impacts
continue to be identified as unavoidable, as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin EIR.
Community Services and Facilities Impact 3.4/S. Consumption of Non-Renewable Natural Resources and
Sewer, Water; and Storm Drainage Impact 3.5/F, H, U Increases in Energy Usage Through Increased
Water Treatment, Disposal and Operation of Water Distribution System: Future development of the
Proj ect will contribute to increased energy consumption.
Soils, Geology, and Seismicity Impact 3.6/B. Earthquake Ground Shaking, Primary Effects: Even with
seismic design, future development ofthe Project could be subject to damage from large earthquakes,
much like the rest ofthe Eastern Dublin planning area.
Air Quality Impacts 3.11/A, B, C, and E. Future development of the Project will contribute to cumulative
dust deposition, construction equipment emissions, mobile and stationary source emissions.
3. Unavoidable Sbmificant Adverse Impacts from the Casamira Vallev Supplemental EIR. The
following unavoidable significant supplemental environmental impacts were identified in the
Supplemental EIR for the Project.
Supplemental Impact TRA-la. Project contribution to impact to Dublin/Dougherty intersection. In the
year 2025, traffic generated by buildout of the proposed Project along with other buildout traffic, would
cause the Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard intersection to operate at an unacceptable level of service
during the p.m. peak hour.
Supplemental Impact TRA-3. Cumulative impacts to local freeways. In the Year 2030 with traffic
generated by buildout of the proposed Project along with other buildout traffic, freeway segments on 1-
580 and 1-680 in the Project area would operate at unacceptable levels of service during the a.m. and p.m.
peak hours.
Supplemental Impact AQ-2. Cumulative air quality emissions. Cumulative regional emissions from the
proposed and other Eastern Dublin development projects would exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of
significance for ozone precursors and PM10.
4. Overridint! Considerations. The City Council previously balanced the benefits of the Eastern
Dublin project approvals against the significant and potentially significant adverse impacts identified in
the Eastern Dublin EIR. The City Council now balances those unavoidable impacts that apply to future
development on the Project site as well as the supplemental unavoidable impacts identified in the
Supplemental EIR, against its benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are
outweighed by the benefits of the Project as further set forth below.
2
The Project will further the urhanization of Eastern Duhlin as planned throngh the comprehensive ~1J Z'11
framework established in the original Eastern Dublin approvals. The modifications to the General Plan
and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan provide housing as anticipated in the Eastern Dublin approvals, but with
the potential for more diversity in the type of housing through attached and detached units. Development
is limited to flatter areas while sensitive creek areas are avoided. Development of the site will also
provide construction employment opportunities for Dublin residents.
3
Casamira Valley Supplemental EIR (SEIR)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
P A #03-060
March 2007
tzJ
~
::z:
H
tJj
H
t-i
tj
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
Supplemental Traffic Mitigation Measure-la. Project Developers Dublin Public Prior to Issuance
The following shall be completed. Works Department of a Building
a) Improvements at the Dublin Permit
Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection are
included in the Eastern Dublin Traffic
Impact Fee (TIP) program. The project is
required to make its fair share payment of
impact fees for these improvements.
b) The proj ect developer shall advance to the
City applicable monies for acquisition of
right-of-way and construction of the
improvements assumed in this study for the
intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty
Road. The amount of money advanced to
the City shall be based on the developer's
fair share of the deficit (spread over those
proj ects that are required to make up the
deficit) between funds available to the City
from Category 2 Eastern Dublin TIP funds
and the estimated cost of acquiring the right-
of-way and constructing the improvements.
<p
-
~
~
~
~
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
The City will provide credit for Category 2
Eastern Dublin TIP to the developer for any
advance of monies made for the
improvements planned for the Dublin
Boulevard/Dougherty Road intersection.
Supplemental Traffic Mitigation Measure-lb. Proj ect Developers Dublin Public Prior to Issuance
The Project developer shall contribute a pro-rata Works Department of a Building
share of the cost to improve the Santa Rita Permit
Road/I- 580 east bound ramp/Pimlico Drive
intersection to include a third left-turn lane for
the eastbound approach and related downstream
improvements as identified by Dublin Public
Works Department. Alternatively, the Project
Developer shall contribute a fair share of the
cost to install the above improvements by
payment of the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact
Fee, if the Traffic Impact Fee is updated to
include the above intersection improvements
prior to the time building permits are issued for
the Project.
Supplemental Traffic Mitigation Measure 2. Project Developers Dublin Public Prior to Certificate
The following shall be implemented. Works Department of Occupancy for
a) The Proj ect developer shall construct the first dwelling unit,
widening of Tassajara Road between as required by
Fallon Road and the City/County line to Public Works
four lanes and shall dedicate additional Director
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 2
~
\)
c:r
N
....S\
~
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
with requirements of the Regional Water Quality Department plans
Control Board shall be prepared and approved by
the City of Dublin Public Works Department
prior to issuance of a grading permit for any
property within the Project area.
Supplemental Drainage Mitigation Measure Proj ect Developers Dublin Public Prior to approval
2. Development within the Project area shall Works Department of improvement
comply with the hydromodification provisions plans
of the Alameda County Clean Water Program as
approved by the RWQCB and administered by
the City of Dublin. If no Alameda County Clean
Water Program permit has been adopted at the
time individual development proposals are
approved by the City, applicant(s) may be
required to submit hydrology and hydrologic
analyses to the City of Dublin Public Works
Department to identify specific increases in
storm water runoff into downstream receiving
waters and measures for ensuring that the
amount and rate of downstream runoff does not
increase over current, pre-project conditions.
Such reports will be reviewed and approved by
both the City of Dublin and Zone 7 Water
Agency. Development projects will also be
required to pay any storm drainage fees in effect
at the time of development.
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 4
'U
0J
~
~
-J
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
Supplemental Biological Resources Mitigation Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Measure la. Project applicants shall preserve Division of grading permit.
lands at a ratio of 3: 1 (preserved:impacted) as
mitigation for the proposed development. All
lands proposed as mitigation must provide
suitable habitat for listed species impacted by the
proposed Proj ect. A conservation easement or
similar mechanism shall be placed on the
mitigation lands to preserve the lands in
perpetuity as a natural open space and habitat for
native plants and animals. An agreement
establishing the conservation easement or similar
mechanism on the mitigation lands must be
completed prior to the initiation of construction
activities.
Supplemental Biological Resources Mitigation Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Measure lb. Project applicants shall establish an Division of grading permit.
endowment in an amount to be determined by the
City, CDFG, and USFWS, for the long-term
management, maintenance, and monitoring of the
mitigation lands placed in the conservation
easement or similar mechanism. Project
applicants shall provide a guarantee of the
endowment to the City prior to the issuance of a
grading permit.
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 5
N
~
~
N
~
.....j
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
property as determined by the Dublin City
Engineer.
b) The Fallon Crossings developers are
required to widen the segment of Tassajara
Road between Northern Access for Dublin
Ranch West and Fallon Road from two
lanes to four lanes. Because the Casamira
Valley Project would contribute to the
projected ADT on this segment, the
Casamira Valley Project shall construct
this widening in the event that this Project
is developed prior to the Fallon Crossings
proj ect.
c) The Dublin Ranch West developers are
required to widen the segment of
Tassajara Road between North Dublin
Ranch Drive and Northern Access for
Dublin Ranch West from two lanes to
four lanes. Because the Casamira Valley
Project would contribute to the projected
ADT on this segment, the Casamira
Valley Proj ect shall construct this
widening in the event that this Proj ect is
developed prior to the Dublin Ranch West
project.
Supplemental Drainage Mitigation Measure 1. Proj ect Developers Dublin Public Prior to approval
A water quality source control plan consistent Works Department of improvement
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 3
N
J
\'V
~
-J
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure lc. Project applicants shall Division of grading permit.
prepare and implement a comprehensive habitat
mitigation and monitoring plan. The plan shall
be reviewed al1:d approved by the City, USFWS,
and CDFG. The comprehensive plan shall be
approved prior to issuance of a grading permit.
The mitigation and monitoring plan shall
incorporate detailed information on the
management, maintenance, and monitoring of
the following resources impacted by the
proposed project including:
a) Wetlands and other waters;
b) Rare plants (Congdon's tarplant and San
Joaquin Spearscale);
c) CTS breeding and terrestrial habitat;
d) CRLF breeding and dispersal habitat;
e) Burrowing owl habitat;
f) San Joaquin kit fox dispersal and foraging
habitat by including kit fox protection
measures adopted by the City of Dublin for
Eastern Dublin properties; and
g) Wildlife corridors for CTS and CRLF.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Miti2ation Measure 2a. Project applicants shall Division of grading permit.
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 6
N
~
~
~
~
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
develop and implement a salvage and recovery
plan, and a preserve management plan for
Congdon's tarplant. The plans shall be reviewed
and approved by the City and CDFG. The
salvage plan shall be implemented prior to
issuance of a grading permit. The plans shall be
prepared by a qualified botanist or restoration
specialist experienced in the development and
implementation of native plant restoration,
mitigation, and management plans. The plans, at
a minimum, shall incorporate the following.
a) Salvage and/or recovery requirements,
including clearly defined goals focusing on
vegetation establishment (stability,
succession, reproduction) and non-native
species control measures;
b) Locations and procedures for
restoration/replanting of salvaged materials
or seeds;
c) Minimum replacement ratio of 1: 1 for
individual plants;
d) Specification of a five-year post-
construction maintenance and monitoring
program by a qualified restoration team to
ensure that the project goals and
performance standards are met. The
monitoring program shall include provision
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 7
N
..j
d=1
~
..J)
-.}
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
for remedial action as needed to correct
deficiencies;
e) Annual reports and a final report, prepared
by the applicant and subject to approval by
the City and the CDFG, shall document the
success of the revegetation. If the
revegetation is not successful, an additional
period of correction and monitoring shall be
specified; and
f) Maintenance requirement and the
responsibility for implementation.
Supplemental Biological Resources Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 2b. The Congdon's Division of grading permit.
tarplant populations in the preserved mitigation
lands will be protected (or similar mechanism)
and managed in perpetuity through the
establishment of conservation easement and
endowment. Congdon's tarplant mitigation may
be accomplished on the same parcels where
mitigation for CTS and other species occurs
provided that 1) the mitigation site is determined
to be suitable for all of these species and 2) the
management plan includes measures for
conservation and enhancement of Congdon's
tarplant.
Supplemental Bioloe:ical Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 8
N
\)l)
~
~
-.i
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
Mitigation Measure 3. Prior to construction in Developers Division of grading permit
the unsurveyed area north of the county line and for property north
on the Tipper property, a qualified botanist shall of the Moller
conduct a reconnaissance-level survey to assess Ranch Project area
the suitability of the habitats to support the and within Contra
special-status plants in Table 4.6.2. If suitable Costa County
habitat is present for any species, focused
protocol-level surveys for those species shall be
conducted. If special-status plants are present,
measures shall be implemented to avoid or
lessen impacts to these species or their habitat.
These measures include redesigning the project
to avoid the plants, installing fencing around the
plant populations to protect them during
construction, and implementing Best
Management Practices near creeks, drainages or
wetlands. If avoidance of the impact is not
feasible, then a salvage and recovery program,
or equivalent, that is developed in consultation
with the City and CDFG shall be implemented
as described in SM-BIO-2. Necessary
consultation shall also be undertaken with
regulatory agencies and Contra Costa County.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 4a. The Project applicants Division of grading permit.
shall preserve in perpetuity an off-site area as
mitigation for impacts to CTS and its terrestrial
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 9
~
~
N
-Sl
.......i
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
and breeding habitat. A minimum mitigation
ratio of 3: 1 (preserved:impacted) shall be
applied to the acreage of upland (terrestrial)
CTS habitat impacted by development (150
acres). Therefore, the mitigation area shall
include a minimum of 450 acres of suitable
upland habitat for CTS. Breeding habitat also
shall be mitigated at a ratio of 3: 1, for a total of
4.5 acres of breeding habitat. Mitigation for
breeding habitat shall include preservation of
suitable CTS breeding habitat at a ratio of 1: 1
(1.5 acres) and creation of additional breeding
habitat at a ratio of2:l (3.0 acres).
Supplemental Biological Resources Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 4b. A conservation Division of grading permit.
easement or equivalent shall be placed on all
mitigation lands establishing the lands as
wildlife habitat in perpetuity. The conservation
easement or equivalent shall be completed prior
to'the initiation of construction activities on the
project site. A comprehensive habitat
management plan shall be developed for the
mitigation site that stipulates allowable activities
(i.e., grazing) and details enhancements to be
completed to improve the breeding and
terrestrial habitat for tiger salamanders. The
habitat management plan shall be submitted to
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 10 ~
~
~
--.j
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
be submitted to the City, USFWS, and CDFG
for review and approval. The applicants shall
provide a secure source of funding in an amount
to be determined by the City and USFWS to
ensure completion of the enhancement activities
on the site and to provide for its long-term
management and maintenance.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 4c. The applicants shall Division of grading permit.
retain the services of a qualified biologist
develop a program to capture and relocate tiger
salamanders from the project site prior to the
initiation of construction. The program,
including specific methods for capturing
salamanders (e.g., drift fencing, pitfall traps,
etc.), location of suitable relocation sites, and
timing of implementation, shall be approved by
the City, USFWS and CDFG and implemented
prior to the initiation of construction.
Supplemental Biological Resources Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 4d. The applicants shall Division of grading permit.
develop and implement a plan to prevent
salamanders from moving into the construction
area during grading or construction activities
and to monitor the site during construction. This
will entail the construction of a temporary
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
\)J
-
Page 11 ~
~
~
-J
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
exclusion fence around the grading envelope.
The plan shall be approved by the City, USFWS,
and CDFG prior to the initiation of construction
activities. Implementation of this plan shall be
required as a condition of approval for the
proj ect.
Supplemental Biological Resources Mitigation Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Measure 4e. The applicants shall erect a Division of grading permit.
permanent, solid, fence to exclude salamanders
from the development area in perpetuity (Note:
curbs cannot be substituted for this purpose).
This amphibian exclusion fencing shall be
inspected at least two times per year (August and
April) and repaired immediately to prevent
salamanders from passing through the fence and
moving onto the project site. An endowment to
provide for the maintenance and repair of the
exclusion fence shall be provided by Project
applicants in an amount to be determined by the
City. The amphibian exclusion fence shall be
constructed around the north, south, and east
sides of the development (no fence will be
required along Tassajara Road). The design of
. the fence shall be approved by the City, USFWS,
and CDFG prior to construction and will be
shown on construction drawings.
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 12 \)J
N
~
N
~
-.)
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning During all phases
Mitigation Measure 4f. Use of roden tic ides for Division of the Project (pre-
the control of ground squirrels and/or other construction,
rodents on undeveloped, open-space portions of construction and
the Project area and in the preserved, mitigation post -construction)
lands shall be prohibited. Only rodent control
methods such as trapping, or other targeted
methods approved by the City shall be
permitted.
Supplemental Biological Resources Mitigation Project Develop~rs Dublin Planning Included in
Measure 4g. The applicants shall incorporate Division roadway
design features into the roadways that parallel improvement
Moller Creek on the north and south to facilitate plans for the
movement of salamanders and other amphibians Moller Ranch
across the road and minimize mortality due to property
vehicle collisions. Roadway undercrossings will
be spaced at intervals no less than 200 feet where
the roadway is bordered by potential CTS upland
habitat. At least one undercrossing shall be
provided in each section of roadway that creates a
barrier between CTS upland habitat and Moller
Creek. No undercrossings shall be required in
front of residences. Design elements to facilitate
salamander movement across the site shall
include construction of culverts under the roads
and permanent, one-way fence/ramp systems that
allow CTS to exit but not enter the roadways.
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 13 \J.J
\).)
~
N
~
-...l
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
The City, CDFG, and USFWS will review and
approve the culvert and barrier design features
prior to roadway construction.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 5a. Mitigation for loss of Division of grading permit.
habitat for California tiger salamander as
described in SM-BIO-4a will also mitigate for -
loss of dispersal habitat for CRLF. CRLF
mitigation may be accomplished on the same
areas where mitigation for California tiger
salamander occurs provided that the following
criteria are met: 1) the mitigation site is
determined t9 be suitable habitat for red-legged
frogs by a qualified biologist; 2) the
management plan includes measures to maintain
and enhance red-legged frog habitat, 3) the site
has an established red-legged frog breeding
pond or is located within 300 feet of a breeding
site on an area preserved and managed for
wildlife habitat values (e.g., regional park,
mitigation site with and existing conservation
easement), and 4) the site is approved for use as
a red-legged frog mitigation site by the City.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 5b. Impacted aquatic Division of grading permit.
habitat shall be mitigated by creating new
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 14 OJ
+-
~
N
..J)
-J
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
breeding habitat at a 2: 1 ratio. A total of 3.0
acres of new breeding habitat will be required to
mitigate this impact. CRLF mitigation may be
accomplished on the same areas where
mitigation for CTS occurs provided that 1) the
mitigation site is determined to be suitable for
both of these species and 2) the management
plan includes measures for conservation and
enhancement of CRLF habitat.
Supplemental Biological Resources Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 5c A habitat mitigation Division of grading permit.
and monitoring plan shall be prepared for the
CRLF mitigation site that stipulates acceptable
land uses, enhancements to be made to the
habitat, and long-term maintenance and
management activities to be implemented on the
site. Enhancements may include the planting of
native emergent wetland species within the
deeper portions of Moller Creek and planting of
native riparian species along the banks of Moller
Creek where riparian vegetation currently does
not exist. The plan shall be approved by the
City, USFWS, and CDFG.
Supplemental Biological Resources Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 5d. The Project applicant Division of grading permit.
will establish an endowment in an amount to be
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 15 01
\S)
~
l'-i
..D
---l
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
determined by the City, CDFG, and USFWS, for
the long-term management, maintenance, and
monitoring of the lands placed in the
conservation easement or similar mechanism as
mitigation for impacts to CRLF breeding and
upland/dispersal habitat. Project applicants shall
provide a guarantee of the endowment to the
City prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 5e. A minimum buffer Division of grading permit
zone of 150 feet shall be maintained around and during
CRLF aquatic habitat during construction. No construction.
staging, parking, material storage, or ground
disturbance will be allowed in the buffer zones.
The buffer zones will be clearly defined with
construction fencing prior to initiation of
construction activities and will be maintained
until completion of the Project.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Included into
Mitigation Measure 5f. The applicant for the Division roadway
Moller Ranch portion of the Project shall improvement
incorporate design features for the loop road that plans for the
parallels Moller Creek specified in SM-BIO-4g Moller Ranch
to facilitate amphibian movement across the portion of the
road into Moller Creek and minimize mortality Project.
due to vehicle collisions.
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 16 ~
~
~
~
-.l
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
due to vehicle collisions.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to issuance
Mitigation Measure 6a. The loss of burrowing Division of grading permit.
owl habitat shall be mitigated by the
preservation of approximately 450 acres of
suitable grassland habitat in the natural open
space in a conservation easement or similar
mechanism as designated in SM-BIO-4a.
Burrowing owl mitigation may be accomplished
on the same parcels where mitigation for CTS
upland habitat and/or CRLF upland habitat
occurs provided that 1) the mitigation site is
determined to be suitable for all of these species
and 2) the management plan includes measures
for conservation and enhancement of burrowing
owl habitat.
Supplemental Biological Resources Proj ect Developers Dublin Planning No more than 30
Mitigation Measure 6b. Preconstruction Division days prior to any
surveys shall be conducted for burrowing owls construction or
prior to ground disturbing activities, including grading activity.
clearing and grubbing. These surveys shall
conform to the survey protocol established by
the California Burrowing Owl Consortium
(Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Survey
Guidelines 1993). Preconstruction surveys shall
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 17
W
-.'I
~
~
-.i
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
be conducted no more than 30 days prior to the
initiation of construction activities and at 30-
day intervals if construction activities have not
been initiated in an area. The following
measures shall also be implemented:
a) Ifburrowing owls are found on the site,
they shall be avoided to the extent
practicable. A clearly defined area (i.e.,
orange construction fencing) shall be
established around each burrowing owl
burrow to be avoided. No disturbance shall
occur within approximately 160 feet of
occupied burrows during the non-breeding
season of September 1 through January 31
or within approximately 250 feet during
the breeding season of February 1 through
August 31._
b) Ifburrowing owls occur on the Project site
and the burrows cannot be avoided, then
passive relocation techniques may be used
to relocate owls from the site during the
non-breeding season (September through
January). Passive relocation includes
excavating all potential burrows after
excluding owls from the burrow for the
required length of time. Passive relocation
shall be done according to the current
protocol established by the CDFG. The
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 18
w
~
~
N
~
-J
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
applicant shall coordinate with CDFG
prior to implementing passive relocation.
Artificial burrows shall be provided on the
mitigation site for each occupied burrow
destroyed on the Project site at a ratio of
2: 1 (two artificial burrows created for each
occupied burrow destroyed)._
c) If a burrowing owl occurs on the Project
site and construction is slated to begin
during the breeding season (February
through August), then a buffer of a radius
of250 feet (75 meters) shall be established
around any burrows containing owls.
Buffer will be monitored and maintained
until owlets are capable of foraging
independently.
d) Removal of burrowing owls on the Project
site shall conform to the requirements of
CDFG's Staff Report on Burrowing Owl
Mitigation (October 1995).
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Prior to any tree
Mitigation Measure 7. A qualified biologist Division pruning, grading
shall conduct raptor and loggerhead shrike nest or other
surveys prior to tree pruning, tree removal, construction
ground disturbing activities, or construction activities.
activities to locate any active nests on or
immediately adiacent to the site. Preconstruction
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 19
OJ
,s,
dl
~
~
--.J
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
to construction or ground disturbing activities
and at 30-day intervals until construction
activities have been initiated in an area.
Preconstruction surveys shall be conducted
between February 1 and August 31. Locations
of active nests shall be described and protective
measures implemented.
Protective measures shall include establishment
of clearly delineated (i.e., orange construction
fencing) avoidance areas around each nest site
that is a minimum of 300 feet from the drip line
of the nest tree or nest for raptors and 100 feet
for shrikes. The active nest sites within an
exclusion zone shall be monitored on a weekly
basis throughout the nesting season to identify
any signs of disturbance. These protection
measures will remain in effect until the young
have left the nest and are foraging independently
or the nest is no longer active. A report will be
prepared at the end of each construction season
detailing the results of the preconstruction
surveys. The report will be submitted to CDFG
by November 30 of each year.
Supplemental Biological Resources Project Developers Dublin Planning Included into
Mitigation Measure 8. The proposed Project Division roadway
would result in a barrier to movement by CTS improvement
and CRLF in this region affecting species plans for the
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 20
...c.
C>
~
~
~
-..)
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
movements to open space lands north, south, Moller Ranch
and east of the Project area. To facilitate portion of the
movement across the site and to breeding habitat Project.
within Moller Creek, the roadway design
features specified in SM-BIO-4g will be
incorporated into the project to allow animals to
cross the road while avoiding traffic.
Supplemental Cultural Resources Mitigation Proj ect Developer City of Dublin Language added to
Measure 1. Conditions of approval shall be Planning Division Stage 1 and Stage
added on all Stage 1 and 2 Development plans 2 Development
to the effect that if archeological materials or Plans
artifacts are identified, work on that portion of
the project shall cease until a resource protection
plan conforming to CEQA Section 15064.5 is
prepared by a qualified archeologist and/or
paleontologist and approved by the City of
Dublin Community Development Director or an
authorized representative. Project work may be
resumed in compliance with such plan. Ifhuman
remains are encountered, the County Coroner
shall be contacted immediately and the
provisions of State law carried out.
Supplemental Cultural Resources Mitigation Project Developers City of Dublin Prior to approval
Measure 2. Prior to approval of Stage 2 for Tipper property Planning Division of Stage 2
Development Plans for the Tipper property and and Contra Costa Development
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 21
-+-
~
~
~
~
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
property within Contra Costa County that would County property Plans
be affected by ground disturbing activities,
detailed cultural resource investigations shall be
completed by qualified archeologists for these
properties as approved by the Dublin Community
Development Director and Contra Costa County
Community Development Department of land
within Contra Costa County.
Supplemental Air Quality Mitigation Project Dublin Planning During grading
Measure 1. In addition to measures identified in Developers Division and construction
MM 3.11/1.0 of the East Dublin EIR, the City of activities
Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water or
cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or
other materials that can be blown by the
wind.
b) Require construction contractors to sweep
daily (preferably with water sweepers) all
paved access road, parking areas and
staging areas at construction sites.
c) Require construction contractors to install
sandbags or other erosion control measures
to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
Supplemental Air Quality Mitigation Proj ect Developers Dublin Building Prior to the
Measure 2. In addition to measures identified in Division approval of Stage
MM 3.11/5.0-11.0 of the East Dublin EIR, the 2 Development
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 22
~
~
N
-1'\
-.i
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
City of Dublin shall require that the following Plan or final
measures, recommended in BAAQMD CEQA subdivision
guidance, be implemented if feasible: map(s), whichever
a) The Proj ect proponent should negotiate is first
with LA VT A for the eventual extension of
transit service to the project site.
Construct or reserve land for transit
facilities such as bus turnouts/bus bulbs,
benches, etc.
b) Provide bicycle land and/or paths,
connected to community-wide network.
c) Provide sidewalks and/or paths, connected
to adjacent land uses, transit stops, and/or
community-wide network.
d) Consider providing shuttle service to
regional transit system or multimodal
center.
e) Consider providing a satellite telecommute
center for project residents.
f) Provide interconnected street network,
with a regular grid or similar
interconnected street pattern.
SM-HAZ-l. Prior to the demolition of any Project Developer Dublin Building Prior to grading
structures within the Project area, applicants Division and operation on this
shall undertake comprehensive asbestos and lead Alameda County site
based paint surveys of those structures and Fire Department
implement appropriate asbestos and lead based
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 23
-L
\}J
~
~
~
~
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
paint handling and disposal methods based on
those surveys and in compliance with all
applicable regulations. Permits and approvals
shall be obtained from appropriate regulatory
agencies. If needed, worker safety plans shall be
included in demolition plans. Asbestos material
and lead-based paint shall be disposed of in
approved landfills. An environmental
professional should be present during
demolition and pre-grading activities to inspect
for any other potential contaminants.
SM-HAZ-2. The following steps shall be taken Proj ect Developer Dublin Building Prior to grading
to reduce the potential impact of release of Division and operations
hazardous material into the soil or groundwater: Alameda County
a) On the Moller portion of the Project area, all Fire Department
observed hazardous or potentially hazardous
materials shall be removed from the property
by licensed waste contractors prior to
grading activities. All hazardous material on
the property shall be identified and disposed
of accordingly.
b) For the Tipper property and property in
Contra Costa County, Phase I and, if
necessary based on the results of the Phase I
analysis, a Phase II Environmental Site
Assessment shall be completed prior to any
demolition or grading activities being
Casamira Valley Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Dublin
Page 24
-C..
-\=-
rY
N
~
~
Mitigation Measure Implementing Monitoring Monitoring Verification
Responsibility Responsibility Schedule
undertaken. Specific recommendations of
the Phase I and lor Phase II reports shall be
followed as specified in each report.
Casamira Valley Project Page 25 ~
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program d:l
City of Dublin ~
~
-.....i