The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReso 127-07 Dublin Village Hist Area SP RESOLUTION NO. 127 - 07 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE INITIAL STUDYIMITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMENDING THE SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE TWO ADDITIONAL PARCELS APN 941-0113-004 & 941-0113-005-02 PA 02-074 WHEREAS, on July 11, 2006, the Planning Commission reviewed the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as well as a General Plan Amendment to re-designate five parcels of land within the Specific Plan area to Parks and Recreation for the future development of a Historic Park. At that meeting, the Planning Commission also recommended that the City Council include three additional parcels within the Specific Plan area to ensure that future development of the properties comply with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan's Design Guidelines and for the purposes of ensuring consistency in the public streetscape; and WHEREAS, on August 1, 2006, the Dublin City Council approved the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan, related General Plan Amendments, Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Master Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning (Resolution 149-06, incorporated herein by reference). The City Council also reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation to include the three additional parcels. As a part of the City Council's action, the three parcels were not added, but the City Council directed Staff to return to the City Council to discuss inclusion of the parcels at a later date; and WHEREAS, on October 3, 2006, the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution 192-06 approving a Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Amendment Study recommended by the Dublin Planning Commission and directed by the Dublin City Council to include three parcels not originally considered for inclusion in the Specific Plan area. Amendments to the Specific Plan include the three parcels and a related amendment of the Zoning Map to apply the Historic Overlay Zoning District to the parcels together constitute the "Project"; and WHEREAS, the three additional parcels proposed to be included are as follows: . 11740, 11746, and 11750 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-004) -- owned by Kenneth and Patricia Burger and contains two office buildings . 11700 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-005-02) -- owned by Oleg and Linda Dubney and contains one office building . 11684 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-007-01) -- owned by the Briarhills of Dublin Cabana Club and contains one building and a swimming pool; and WHEREAS, on June 12, 2007, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Number 07-29 recommending approval for the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Specific Plan Amendments to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2007, the Heritage and Cultural Arts Commission recommended approval for the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Specific Plan Amendments for the Specific Plan Update to the City Council; and Page 1 of 15 WHEREAS, on July 3, 2007, the City Council held a public hearing on said application directed Staff to modify the Resolution approving an Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and amending the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and an Ordinance to amend the Zoning Map to add two parcels at the following meeting with the revised Resolution and Ordinance on the consent calendar; and WHEREAS, the two additional parcels proposed to be included are as follows: . 11740, 11746, and 11750 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-004) -- owned by Kenneth and Patricia Burger and contains two office buildings . 11700 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-005-02) -- owned by Oleg and Linda Dubney and contains one office building WHEREAS, Staff considered whether adding these two parcels to the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan would constitute a substantial change to the project as analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines ~ 15162 and 15163 and concluded that it would not. Staff determined that an Addendum would be prepared which notes the minor changes in the Project compared to the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, dated July 2007, is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. incorporated herein bv reference and available for review at City Hall during normal business hours. The Addendum determined that the Project is minor in nature; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, no subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) shall be prepared for this project, as no substantial changes have been proposed to the project which require revisions of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. No new significant environmental impacts have been identified and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts have been discovered; and WHEREAS, on the City Council did hold a public hearing on said application July 17,2007, for the Project; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the City Council approve the request for amendments to the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council has reviewed and considered the Addendum dated July 2007, together with the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (attached as Exhibits A and B to this Resolution), and finds that these documents reflect the independent judgment of the City Council and the City as the lead agency in the CEQA process. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council approves the following amendments to the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan based on findings that the amendments are in the public interest: A. Section 4.2 Topography and Natural Features on page 9 will be amended as follows: The project area is approximately 40 acres in size and is generally flat with a gradual slope to the south. Dublin Creek runs through the area from west to east on the Hexcel property and between the Heritage Center/Pioneer Cemetery and the Dublin Creek 2 of 15 Kennel site. Alamilla Springs, a fresh water spring that was once the main watering hole for Dublin Village, sits to the northwest of the Dublin Boulevard/San Ramon Road intersection. A majority of the properties are developed and the Specific Plan area lies in an urbanized portion of Dublin. Exhibit 3 shows the boundary of the Specific Plan area. B. Section 4.4 Existing Land Use and Property Parcelization on page 12 will be amended as follows: A summary of parcels in the project area, including lot sizes and ownership (as taken from the most recent County Assessor records) is contained in the Appendix A of this document. Overall, there are 23 parcels in the project area with 17 different owners. The City of Dublin owns four parcels, the Dublin Historical Preservation Association owns two parcels, CalTrans owns two, and Hexcel Corporation owns two. All other property owners own one parcel apiece. C. Section 5 Land Use Concept Table on page 21 will be amended as follows: Section 5.1: Existing Development and Proposed Development Potential No General Plan density or intensity increases are proposed for properties in the Specific Plan area. However, there is development potential in the area due to the fact that the sites are currently developed at less than the maximum intensity permitted in the General Plan (See Table 1). All of this capacity exists today. The land use changes in the Historic Area Specific Plan decrease the development potential by shifting approximately 7.55 acres ofland from RetaiVOffice to Parks/Public Recreation. Table 1: Maximum Development Potential in the Specific Plan area (Existing development acreage and square footage from the Alameda County Assessor's Office - current as of March 2006) SP/GP land use Amount of Amount of Floor to Area Ratio or Development Difference category existing proposed number of dwelling Potential under development acreage in units Specific Plan Specific Plan area Retail/Office 217,882 square 12.55 acres .25 to .60 FAR Up to 328,086 SF +110,204 SF feet on 20 acres Med/High 150,656 SF (176 8.28 acres 14-25 units/acre Up to 207 units +31 units Density Res. units) on 8.28 acres Business Park! 56,054 square 8.95 acres .30 to.40 FAR Up to 154,202 SF +98,148 SF Industrial feet on 8.95 acres Parks/Public 6,344 square feet 10.07 acres No specific 7,144 SF * + 800 SF Recreation on 2.52 acres development intensity noted Total 279,770 SF and 489,432 SF +209,152 SF 176 units on and 207 units and +31 units ~39.75 acres * Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan proposes an 800 square foot pavilion/classroom building. 3 of 15 ADDENDUM TO THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PA 02-074 JULY 2007 On August 1, 2006, the Dublin City Council adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Master Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning. The MND is incorporated herein by reference, and available for review at Dublin City Hall. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PRIOR APPROVALS Prior to the Dublin Historic Area Specific Plan adoption by City Council on August 1, 2006, the Specific Plan was considered by the Planning Commission at the July 11, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting, the Planning Commission questioned why three parcels along Dublin Boulevard were not included in the boundary of the Specific Plan. The Planning Commission expressed their interest in including three additional properties in the Specific Plan boundary for the purposes of ensuring that any redevelopment of these properties would be in compliance with the Specific Plan's Design Guidelines and for the purposes of ensuring consistency of the public streetscape. On October 3, 2006, the Dublin City Council approved a Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Amendment Study to include three parcels not originally considered for inclusion in the Specific Plan area. The three parcels were identified as follows: . 11740,11746,11750 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-004) -- property is owned by Burger Livermore Valley and contains two office buildings. . 11700 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-005-02) -- property is owned by Oleg and Linda Dubney and contains one office building. . 11684 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-007-01) -- property is owned by the Briarhills of Dublin Cabana Club and contains one building and a swimming pool. During the July 3, 2007 City Council meeting Staff was directed to omit the Briarhills parcel from inclusion within the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary. Therefore the two parcels proposed for inclusion within the Specific Plan boundary are as follows: . 11740, 11746, 11750 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-004) -- property is owned by Burger Livermore Valley and contains two office buildings. . 11700 Dublin Boulevard (APN 941-0113-005-02) -- property is owned by Oleg and Linda Dubney and contains one office building. Addendum to the approved MND for the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and amendments, Zoning Map Update, and Historic Overlay designation, PA 02-074 lof3 E,x.t4 t &.T A D, Amend the Downtown S ' Area Specific PI peclfic Plans L 1 an as follows: oca Context Ma (E ., P xhlblt 2) of h t e Dublin V'll . . I age Historic @ Exhibit 2 Downtown Specific Plans Local Context Buildings ,,- - - f#~~ - ...... - - = ---.;;;::. ~ July 2007 =~~~:'.~. ~1:I:X:O:l .06:11 ((1:1 t1:li uoo ';00 ) ,.., " " ... E. Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Boundary Map (Exhibit 3) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: ~ Exhibit 3 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Boundary Freeway Streets - DJbhn Lots Buildings C Spec!le Plan /'lea ~ July 2007 ~""f'Vf".,l,""":" c.:4,Ill:.'WZL......,.I........ , "':'I:",:.~\t ..,,, 'M' :r.:>>. o.Ot "'.. F. Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Existing Land Uses Map (Exhibit 4) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: @ Exhibit 4 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Existing Land Uses Buldlrgs -~b"nl.Ots Steels Freew ay Existing Land Use Apartment COmplex Cemelary - Church - Daycare Center Gas Station - Heritage Center - ResldentlallKennel - om'e Complex - (;(lICe ana Ma",ractunng Facility t- ResiijenllallSWlm POOl - RestlXanl - Ret"l - vacart - ~ July 2007 ..::lTth,........':.....O. ~...=~rr:,...).1 ..., '"' oo~ ... G, Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Existing General Plan Land Use Map (Exhibit 5) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: ~ Exhibit 5 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Existing General Plan Land Use Bllldlngs - ~blln lOts SteelS FreE!'Nay General Plan Land Use pub/lclSeml-l'ublcfOpen Space DClsem~ubllC Fa'lIlty ParkSI PutlllC Recreallon Commere/alllnClu.lt1a1 Rel"I.oflce Business ParkllOdustrlal - Residenrl., MedlumlHigl>-OenSlty ReSldennal - $ July 2007 ;:~~~:-;~~l~~ , '~$~"'" .,;:1;:1 X1;:1 ~ '"' '" ... H. Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Zoning Map (Exhibit 6) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: @ Exhibit 6 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Zoning IiJlldlngs D.Jblin LOIS Streels Freeway Zoning A AJrjcu<<ure - C-l Retail Commercial C-N Neighborhood Comm.,.cia/ - C-O Commeroal C1fi~ ----3 M- 1: light Industnal - PO Planned O':....topmenl - R-l-B-E Single Family Resldenhal - R-l S,ngle Famly ReSldenlial R-M 4l,<<..Family Residenhal L-..J ~ July 2007 ~"'.':.I"t,lL.lM;" C.:An:-.L"""'f.:'L"\).' ..u:'t;"'~\' .... 'N' ,.r .... 1. Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Circulation Map (Exhibit 7) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Circulation Buildings Freeway Bicycle trails Oass " EXlsbng, Bike Path Oass " Pr~osed, Bike Path Oass 2, Existing, Bike Lane e=lil= Oass 2, Pr~osed, Bike Lane 0=0= Clculatlon /'ltenal - Oass 2 Residential Colleeror - Local Residential PrIVate Resldenosl ~ July 2007 't:l'Tl 't'. ........... ~.,l>>"'... :-::::f:=:"~\>"''''1.t.'';r.1 "', "''' ,... ... ..... J, Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Utility Plan Map (Exhibit 8) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: (t) Exhibit 8 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Utility Plan Buildings Dublin Lots Streets Freeway Storm Drain Structures TYPE Rlp-Rap . Pnvate Inlet In..Qut D Inlet . LUG 0 MannOle .. Pflvate Collector Storm Drain Mains Mol. TERIA L .---... Otten __ RetntQfcea Concrete 80)( _____ ReinfOfCe-o Concrete PIpe July 2007 ~ ~U:~~;-~'la;:~. l~~....t :u....,,\~~*_:M:o.a;S'U:l ""1poI.,....we.....",..........! ~~~:;,"'::I~. 't~...f',I:t~..,.... 100:lOG I;QQ '"' , " ... K. Amend the Vision Diagram for the Dublin Village Historic Area Map (Exhibit 9) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: LEGEND . (!}I:] t\ o o c:;::::;) D If Hiltoric Monument Sign S tre ,tlCI p./P,du tria n Enhancement. Gatlway Slgn.g. Hiltorlc COte Opportunity Sit, lor Entry Piau Opportunity Sit, tor Murlll Opportunity Sit. 'or Hiltorlc Resource R.novIUon INTERSTATE 580 \I t>-\l.Q OU\.~ QU~\.\~ ~ Conceptual Vision For the Future of Dublin Village L. Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Land Use Plan Map (Exhibit 10) of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: (i) Exhibit 10 Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Land Use Plan BUildings -~DllnlOts S~eels Freeway General Plan Land Use publlclSeml-PublcfOpen Spaee Parksl PubliC Recrealon commen=ialAndusrrel Retaol.once !:.... BUSiness Pall<J1ndUSt1la, - ResKlen#al SIIlQIe Fam.y Re!>ldentlal 1!:3 Med1urruHj9~Density ReSIClental - $ JUly 2007 ...:!'It.'''.n~''''l.la''Il.o' ~1t,l_L",,""''':I''.''. 'U:1:\oU"~ ..., 'M' '" .... M. Amend the Existing and Proposed Monument Sign Map of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: e Existing Monument Sign II Proposed Monument Sign INTERSTATE 580 N. The text in Appendix A will be amended as follows: Property owners in the Specific Plan area (per the Alameda County Assessor's Office as of March 31, 2006) Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Owner Names Site Address 941-1560-009-01 Hexcel Corporation 11711 Dublin Boulevard 941-1560-003-04 Hexcel Corporation Not available 941-1560-001-01 City Of Dublin 6506 Donlon Way 941-1560-001-02 City Of Dublin 6600 Donlon Way 941-1560-002 -02 Haqan, Steven E & Susan E 6572 Donlon Way 941-0040-006-16 Delorenzo, Mario & Dannye A 11865 Dublin Boulevard Fang Yuan Development & Investment 941-0113-003-01 Corp 11760 Dublin Boulevard 941-0113-154 Hoffman, Donald N & Mavis W 11824 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-001-02 P T & T Co 279-1-34-4 11991 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-001-12 Equilon Enterprises Lie 11989 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-003-02 Dambrosio Brothers Investment Company 11891 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-004 Trivalley Church Of Christ 11873 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-005-02 Cranbrook Realty Investment Fund Lp 11887 Dublin Boulevard 941-1560-007 -01 Berkelev Land Company Inc 11759 Dublin Boulevard 941-1560-006 City of Dublin Not available 941-1560-005 City Of Dublin Not available 941-1560-003-03 DHPA Not available 941-1560-010-01 DHPA Not available 941-1550-002-02 CalTrans Not available 941-1550-001-10 CalTrans Not available 941-0040-006-1 0 Dublin 9-10b Lie 7100 San Ramon Road 941-0013-005-02 Oleg and Linda Dubney 11700 Dublin Boulevard 11740, 11746 & 11750 Dublin 941-0013-004 Burqer Livermore Valley Boulevard O. Amend the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Assessor's Parcel Number Map in Appendix A of the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan as follows: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July 2007 by the following vote: ~ Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan Assessor's Pa rcel Number o:::::J SpeollC Plan ,",rea - [)JblnLcU StreEts Fr@fH..aj ~ >Cl't't'..r:t~...,..,..:,. ~ ~,._,-"...... a&.l."'I:1rt,,".. July 2007 :l 'I;l::l;:OO oI(lQ '"' '" ... Councilmembers Hildenbrand, Oravetz, Sbranti, Scholz and Mayor Lockhart A YES: NOES: ABSENT: None None Oa/Jtd~~.J,A~)i ABST AIN: None Revisions to the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan The Project amends the Specific Plan to extend the planning area boundary to include the two above- referenced parcels. Conforming amendments to exhibits, text and tables will reflect the expanded Specific Plan area. Zoning Amendment The Project amends the Zoning Map to add the Historic Overlay Zoning District to the two properties in the expanded Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan and Zoning Map amendments are collectively referred to as the "Project." PRIOR CEQA ANALYSES AND DETERMINATIONS An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISIMND) was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. The Specific Plan project encompassed approximately 38 acres, including land use changes on approximately 7.5 acres, adoption of a Historic Park Master Plan and related actions. The Specific Plan site included Dublin's existing Heritage Center as well as interim and ultimate improvements in an identified expansion area. Dublin Creek runs through the southerly portion of the Specific Plan area. The ISIMND identified potential impacts and mitigations for the Specific Plan project, mostly related to potential future construction and ground disturbance in the creek area. The Specific Plan project would also involve demolition of certain existing structures; related mitigations require compliance with asbestos and lead-based paint removal procedures. CURRENT CEQA ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION THAT AN ADDENDUM IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE PROJECT The City has determined that an Addendum to the adopted ISIMND is the appropriate CEQA review for the Project. Prior to making this determination, the City reviewed the ISIMND to determine whether further environmental review was required for the current proposal to incorporate two parcels into the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan boundary and to amend the Zoning Map to add the Historic Overlay Zoning District to the two parcels. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 identifies the conditions requiring subsequent environmental review. After review ofthese conditions and the adopted ISIMND dated May 25,2006, the City has determined that no subsequent environmental review is required for this Project. The current Project adds two properties to the Specific Plan area and applies the City's Historic Overlay Zoning to these properties. The properties are across Dublin Boulevard from the planned Historic Park but are not included in the Historic Park. The two properties are already developed and no change to the existing general plan or zoning uses is proposed. The properties are not near Dublin Creek or the existing Heritage Center. Addendum to the approved MND for the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and amendments, Zoning Map Update, and Historic Overlay designation, PA 02-074 20f3 This determination is based on the above description of the Specific Plan project, the previously identified impacts and mitigation measures, and the factors noted above. a) Are there substantial changes proposed to the project which will require major revisions to a previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects? There are no substantial changes from the project analyzed in the ISIMND. b) Are there substantial changes which will occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions to a previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects? There are no substantial changes in the conditions assumed in the ISIMND. c) Is there new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known at the time a previous EIR(s) was certified or Negative Declaration was adopted which shows the Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR(s) or Negative Declaration; or, significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; or, mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative; or, mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative? There is no new information showing a new or more severe significant effect that has not already been identified and analyzed as part of the ISIMND d) Ifno subsequent EIR-level review is required, should a subsequent Negative Declaration be prepared? No subsequent Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required because there are no impacts, significant or otherwise, of the Project beyond those identified in the adopted ISIMND. Conclusion. Pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, no subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be prepared for this project, as no substantial changes have been proposed to the project which require revisions of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. No new significant environmental impacts have been identified and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts have been discovered. With minor technical amendments as outlined in this Addendum, the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration will continue to adequately address the environmental impacts of the project for the purposes of CEQA. As provided in Section 15164, this Addendum need not be circulated for public review, but shall be considered with the prior Mitigated Negative Declaration before making a decision on the Project. Addendum to the approved MND for the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and amendments, Zoning Map Update, and Historic Overlay designation, PA 02-074 30f3 " / . Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning . Planning Application File No. PA 02-074 Lead Agency City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 Public Review period: May 31, ~006 - June 30, 2006 . EXHIBIT 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS . Environmental Checklist Form........................................................................................... ............................ 1 Background and Project Description ............................ .................................................... ..... .............. ..........3 Existing Physical Setting, Uses, and Structures............................ ................................ ~............ ...... ............. 5 Exhibit 1: Regional Context............................................................. ..................................... ..... ......... ..........7 Exhibit 2: Project area Boundary................. ...................... ....................................... ..... ...............................8 Exhibit 3: Assessor Parcel Number and Address Map .................................................................................9 Exhibit 4: Building and Resource Site Map...... ........ .... .................................... ........ ..................... .............. 10 Exhibit 5: Proposed Land Use Plan for the Project area (excerpted from the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan)............................................................................. 11 Exhibit 6: Proposed Interim Historic Park Improvements............................................................................ 12 Exhibit 7: Proposed Ultimate Historic Park Improvements.......................................................................... 13 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected. ....;............................................ ............................................... 15 Determination.......................................... ..... .................................. .............. .......................... ..................... 15 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ...... ............ ...... .... ......... ......................... ........ ........ .................. .......... 16 Aesthetics.......................................................................................... ........................ ............................ ........ 18 Agricultural Resources.............................................................................................................................. ..... 18 Air Quality. ......... .......... ............ ............................. ......... ............ ........ .................................. ............... ........... 19 Biological Resources....................... ........................................................... ................................................... 23 Cultural Resources................................................................................................................................ ........25 Geology and Soils............................ ..... ..............................................~. ......................................................... 28 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.............................................. ...................................................................30 Hydrology and Water Quality .. ......... ........................ ........ .......... ............. ....................................................... 32 Land Use and Planning .................... ............ .............. ....... ....................... ...................... .............. ...... ........... 34 Mineral Resources......................................................................................................................................... 35 Noise........................................................................................................................................... ................... 35 Population and Housing................................................................................................................................. 37 Public Services ... .... ....... ...... ....... ................... .......... ............... ...... .... ................. ........... ....... ........ .................. 37 Recreation............................................................................................................................................. ........ 38 Transportation and T raffle.................................................................. .................................................. .......... 38 Utility and Services Systems... ........... ..... ........ ............. .... .......... .............. ..... ... .............................................. 39 Mandatory Findings of Significance. .................................................................................................... ........40 Background Information.................................... ..................................................................... ............ ..........42 Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration . . . . . '0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM -INITIAL STUDY This Initial Study has been prepared in accord with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to assess the potential environmental impact of implementing the proposed project described below. The Initial Study consists of a completed environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the checklist. 1. Project Title: Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 3. Contact Persons and Phone Number: Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner Community Development Department (925) 833-6610 4. Project Location: Approximately 38 acres surrounding the intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard. Specifically, Assessor Parcel Numbers 941-0040-006-10, 941-0040-006-16, 941-0113- 003-01,941-0113-154,941-1550-001-02,941-1550-001-12, 941-1550-003-02,941-1550-004,941-1550-005-02,941- 1560-001-01,941-1560-001-02,941-1560-002-02,941- 1560-003-03, 941-1560-005, 941-1560-006, 941-1560-007- 01,941-1560-003-04,941-1560-009-01,941-1560-010-01, 941-1550-002-02, and 941-1550-001-10. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 6. General/Specific Plan Designation: Various, including Parks/Public Recreation, Retail/Office, Business Park/Industrial, Medium Density Residential 7. Zoning: Various, including C-1 (Retail Commercia!), M-1 (Light Industrial), A (Agriculture), R-M (Medium Density Residential), PD (Planned Development), C-O (Commercial Office), and C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 1 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 8. Surrounding land uses and setting: North: Residential and Commercial Office South: Interstate 580 East: San Ramon Road West: Single-family Residential and Business Park . 9. Other Public Agencies: None 10. Actions to which this Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration may be applied (including but not limited to): Dublin City Council approval of General Plan Amendments in the project area Dublin City Council approval of the Draft Dublin Village Histone Area Specific Plan DubliJi City Council approval of the Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update Dublin City Council Approval of the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan Dublin City Council Approval of Amendments to the Zoning Map for the Dublin Village Histone Area Dublin City Council Rescission of the Dublin Village Design Guidelines Dublin City Council Approval of an Amendment to Chapter 8.62 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Historic Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review) Acquisition by the City of Dublin of any property within the project area that is identified in the Dublin Village Histone District Specific Plan for park purposes Building and Grading Permits issued by the City of Dublin Encroachment Permits or other permits issued for streetscape and roadway improvements by the City of Dublin . Water Service Permits issued by the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) Permits issued by the State Department of Fish and Game or other regulatory agencies for improvements made adjacent to Dublin Creek (as needed) Any action of the Federal Department of the Interior or the California State Office of Historic Preservation relating to the formal designation of historic resources . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 2 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Background In August 2001 the Dublin City Council initiated a specific plan study for the Donlon Way area, which comprises the City's historic settlement area (Exhibit 2). The City Council desired to mold this core area into a cohesive historic district to better highlight Dublin's historic and archeological resources, to protect and preserve these resources, and to further enhance the area with development that is compatible with the historic buildings and remnants in the area. In addition to the specific plan study, the City has also been examining various ways to eliminate the 5.3-acre parkland deficit that was identified in the Park and Recreation Master Plan 2004 Update. The City has considered several potential park sites, one of which is the Dublin Square Shopping Center site adjacent to the City's Heritage Center and .in the project area. The two parallel planning processes (the Historic Area Specific Plan study and Parkland Deficit Elimination assessment) have moved forward concurrently, .and it is the intention that this Initial Study be the environmental document which covers the entirety of these activities and the actions described as follows. Project Description In an effort to further the City's efforts stated above, the City of Dublin is proposing the following actions, which collectively describe the project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): 1. Adoption of an amendment to the City of Dublin General Plan to change the land use designation (and any related map or text amendments) on the parcels listed as follows (See Exhibit 3 for reference): Site Common Name Address APN Existing GP land Proposed GP land use use designation designation Dublin Square 11759 Dublin Blvd. 941-1560-007-01 Retail/Office Parks/Public Recreation Shopping Ctr. Green Store 11873 Dublin Blvd. 941-1550-004 Retail/Office Parks/Public Recreation Hawthorne Lane/ N/a 941-1560-005 Retail/Office Parks/Public Recreation Pioneer Cemetery Pioneer Cemetery N/a 941-1560-006 Retail/Office Parks/Public Recreation DHPA parcel N/a 941-1560-003-03 Retail/Office Parks/Public Recreation 2. Adoption of the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. The Specific Plan contains greater detail on the City's goals for the historic area, an analysis of the existing conditions in the area, design guidelines for future development in the area, recommendations for streetscape improvements, and designation of the specific plan land use categories compatible with the General Plan. Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 3 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 'f..'}. ,,,..~,'- 3. Rezoning of sites in the Project area to reflect General Plan Amendment. Rezoning to change the zoning desjgnation for the following sites to become compatible with the Park/Public Recreation Specific Plan and . General Plan land use designations: Green Store 11873 Dublin Blvd. 941-1550-004 Planned Development Proposed Zoning Planned Development (Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) Planned Development (Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan) Site Common Name Dublin Square Shopping Ctr. Address 11759 Dublin Blvd. APN 941-1560-007-01 Existing Zoning C-1 (Retail Commercial) 4. Adoption of an amendment to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2004 Update to reflect the elimination of the park deficit after the General Plan land use change and to note the future Dublin Historic Park location. 5. Adoption of the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. The Dublin Historic Park.Draft Master Plan contains the Conceptual Design for the park including both interim and ultimate improvements. (See Exhibits 6 and 7 for a description of the interim and ultimate improvements). Interim improvements include streetscape improvements along Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way, acquisition and demolition of the existing shopping center at 11759 Dublin Boulevard, construction of the park parking lot, and installation turf as well as temporary rotor irrigation. Ultimate improvements include full construction of all park and cemetery facilities as . shown in Exhibit 7. 6. Rescission of the Dublin Village Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines were adopted in January 2005 with the intention that they would serve until the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan was finalized and adopted, which would contain the design guidelines inside the specific plan document. Once the Specific Plan is in place, there is no need for the stand-alone design guidelines document. 7. Amendment to Chapter 8.62 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Historic Overlay Zoning District Site Development Review). This section of the Zoning Ordinance will be amended to remove reference to development in the Project area needing to be in compliance with the Dublin Village Design Guidelines and instead note that development in the Project area will need to be in compliance with the Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. a. Acquisition of those sites in the specific plan area designated Parks/Public Recreation that will be needed for the implementation of the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. 9. Demolition of the existing structures and pavement on the Dublin Square Shopping Center site (APN 941- 1560-007 -01) to prepare for the implementation of the Daft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. 10. Construction of the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan interim improvements. 11. Construction of the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan ultimate improvements. . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 4 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25. 2006 . . ,.f'~ - EXISTING PHYSICAL SETTING, USES AND STRUCTURES Project Location The City of Dublin is a community of approximately 39,610 people located in the Amador Valley of central Alameda County. The precise location of Dublin is identified in Exhibit 1. The Dublin Village Historic Area consists of approximately 38 acres of land located northwest of San Ramon Road and Interstate 580. The Historic Area includes commercial, residential, public. and business parklindustrial properties near the intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard. as shown in Exhibit 2. From this point forward, the Dublin Village Historic Area will be referred to as the "Project Area." Specifically. the project area is made up of the following parcels (as shown in Exhibit 3): ~iJrcel'NulDl3er j~"i$$lld"":' Addres$ . ...$n1.. ..m ft 941-0040-006-10 ~Dartment complex 7100 San Ramon Road 941-0040-006-16 Retail store 11865 Dublin Boulevard 941-0113-003-01 Daycare Center 11760 Dublin Boulevard 941-0113-154 Office Building 11824 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-001-02 Telecommunications switching station' 11991 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-001-12 Gas station 11989 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-003-02 Restaurant 11891 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-004 Church 11873 Dublin Boulevard 941-1550-005-02 Office Park 11887 Dublin Boulevard 941-1560-0Q1-01 City Of Dublin Heritage Center: St Raymond's Church 6506 Donlon Way City Of Dublin Heritage Center. Murray Schoolhouse and 941-1560-001-02 Pioneer Cemetery 6600 Donlon Way 941-1560-002-02 Single Familv Home and Dog Kennel 6572 Donlon Way Vacant property owned by Dublin Historical Preservation 941-1560-003-03 Association No address 941-1560-005 City of Dublin Heritage Center: Pioneer Cemetery No address 941-1560-006 City Of Dublin' Heritage Center. Pioneer Cemetery No address 941-1560-007-01 Retail ShOD Ding Center 11759 Dublin Boulevard 941-1560-003-04 Hexcel Corooration Business Park No address 941-1560-009-01 Hexcel Corooration Business Park 11711 Dublin Boulevard 941-1560-010-01 Medical buildina No address 941-1550-002-02 Vacant property owned by Caltrans No address 941-1550-001-10 Vacant property owned by Caltrans No address Physical Setting, Uses, and Structures The general character of the project area is urbanjzed postwar suburban, and although today dominated by late twentieth century commercial, retail and residential uses. the project area also contains several historically significant buildings, structures, sites, objects and landscape features dating from the latter half of the nineteenth century and the early part of the twentieth century. Most of the buildings in the project area are commercial and . residential structures of one and two stories, built primarily in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's, but there are several Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 5 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning . May 25, 2006 historic structures as well. Exhibit 4 shows the general location and common names of the buildings and sites in the area. . Identified historic resources are concentrated along Donlon Way, centering on the City-owned Dublin Heritage Center site, which includes the Murray Schoolhouse, Dublin Pioneer Cemetery and St. Raymond's Church. Another identified historic resource is Green's Store, a privately owned former general store and tavern located on the southeast comer of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way. Previously unidentified potential historic resources are scattered throughout the survey area. These include: "Ponderosa," a circa-1929 bungalow at 6570 Donlon Way; the Bonde House, a circa-1923 bungalow at 11760 Dublin Boulevard; Alamilla Springs and remnants of a walnut grove at 71 00 San Ramon Road; historic walnut and pepper trees on the Heritage Park Office Center property at 11887 Dublin Boulevard; as well as potential archaeological sites in the vicinity of Dublin Creek and the Heritage Park Office Center. The other structures in the area are a 176 unit apartment complex on the north side of Dublin Boulevard (The Springs Apartments), an approximately 41 ,000 square foot commercial center on the southwest comer of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way (Dublin Square Shopping Center), and an approximately 106,000 square foot office complex on the southeast comer of Dublin Boulevard and Donlon Way (Heritage Park Office Center). The Hexcel Corporation owns an approximately 56,000 square foot light industrial office/manufacturing complex on the south side of Dublin Boulevard, between the street and Interstate 580. Other smaller-scale commercial buildings are also prevalent in the area and include a gas station, restaurant, bank, and other retail and office establishments. In addition to the built environment, the project area also contains a valuable natural resource. Dublin Creek r.uns through the portion of the project area adjacent to the Dublin Heritage Center and the vacant property proposed . for the cemetery expansion. Although partially channeled today, this section of Dublin Creek retains its natural bed as well as some of its riparian woodland corridor. . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 6 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25. 2006 . . . EXHIBIT 1: REGIONAL CONTEXT i . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning @2006 N"VTEQ Page 7 of 42 May 25, 2006 EXHIBIT 2: PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY 01 e (i) (I) 10 C '" 0\(1)10 C:' fl j 10"'- '" a. =<cc.. 10 ,., -' .. '" .~ i >~~ "C !I: 1;; .. C ~ i :is ;i c"'- ::::l IS ::> _,gu ~ ... Cl) II) 15(1)(1) I ~'[]! ::::l'- a. \: ~l OJ:Vl 1! .,~ it ~.. : ~ n~ ! ~i' co !laB ~ lil 5 . <<9- III I' 't , "; i '. I '; \ 1 'I.... ..___ I, " t \ \ ~. ~ t" I l.;-~ .- '--'-- .--..--".,-.. ..._~. .--rrr';- . I, I \ ! i 1 I ~ \ \ ii' , _~"., i'l\ \ Ii i! '! ! . 1 i , ;. , ; 5! ; !! j .11 i ill i i i Ii , ( II 1 ! 1, . I " ! . \! I ! i', ; \ \! 1\1 ! I; L! ! I! I }~ ; ~ !' i _~A:; . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 8 of 42 May 25, 2006 . EXHIBIT 3: ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER AND ADDRESS MAP @) &18C: co....!!! E<CQ. >uu c: 'C !E =,Su ..o(lla> 6:Ebr _VI ... ... - a> ~8.o a>:oE VI Q. ;j ~ z ~ Iii a: ! ,g . ~ I i J j DI .~ ,,J w ~ h :B '" Us 1 ti~ ~ i~2 iol g ~ II . i! . ./ ,f t f . / ;; f ./ '. ;' , \ \ \ . \ ;--1 .../'. ../ .. ~-,.._......w.._- J.- .r .-.- ~ _~...?o. ...... .. :r:::::.----. .""......... ,..,.. .._......l....'!"'""":-..~- , : \ i ! ~ ; ; i ~ . I ! ! i i ! ! 8 ~ .:. ~~4 :i' ::~ i~ ~ . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park I?raft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 9 of 42 May 25, 2006 EXHIBIT 4: BUILDING AND RESOURCE SITE MAP ~~'f ~~. e e. . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 10 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . EXHIBIT 5: PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN FOR THE PROJECT AREA (FROM THE DRAFT DUBLIN VILLAGE HISTORIC AREA SPECIFIC PLAN) (i) II) 1'0 e ClII)1'O 1'0..._ =<(0- >uu e 'i:: ~ .o~~ ;:j - 0.. OJ:Vl II . .. ~:- '\:Iii ~i i I ~~ ~ I - ~ ~ ! ; ~'iII liS Iii ie liS oi .L,8 .. J! ~1f !:i :!l ~ ;;; ~ ~ il> ~ ~ - 2 .. i 'ii 01 e Q. .;:. ~ .. Ii '" F.III II .~ io: I :~.. _ r.~~ g, r.i~ ~ ~~~ "'011) II) III ~ ::> e 0.. "'0 ..!Q o eo... 6:~ !Ii :s <I t ! ! 11 '" c ..j I ' , ID ; ~ m '" ... @- 71 . . ,/: . . . . .......... ....--:........-.. ,_..- .' .' - .. ~._'W ":" f ; . , ; : ! " ! ~ ~ ;'1 ~ "i ~ I ~ ,; i ~ i : !; ! . ,1 j ~ : ! j; Ii : j i i j! : i ~ . i j ~ ! : II j I I; l \. 'I' ! I! ! :} ~ i ~ ! :. : ~ ; ~ Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 11 of 42 May 25, 2006 n'~~b.'+ -w -,. -' ~, .":- . . ':_"'~:;:...::.." ~. "- . j . :~',:.-~>~V,', < :~ I: :;. "~" :'.?~/,:' ~;.' . I ~: n' ....}.:\:.~=~ . ..,:,.." .- - ' - .. ...:", -'.~, .: .:~ . ~ "r,:- .'1/ ~L. " "--~., '. -;;". . , . - - ,-.." '. , , . ". ;'" . i. . - . . . '. ~.~..... , " . ..... .-" . ' , -. L. ..-. -- --~ Phase 55 5treetscape improvements CD Demolish existing sidewalk along Dublin Boulevard and north end of Donlon Way, asphalt in median on Dublin Boulevard, asphalt on Donlon Way adjacent to Green Store. (Exclude from demolition areas of sidewalk and driveway needed to maintain access to Dublin Square shopping center.) Relocate storm drains, ('II Construct new sidewalk and median on Dublin Boulevard. r;--,. .-' , '_/ Install trees in sidewalk and median on Dublin Boulevard. Install tree grate for trees in sidewalk. :-I': Install unit paving and special crosswalk paving on Donlon Way, (i) Restripe street. add bike lanes. Demolition Drainage Paving Planting & irrigation Site furnishings & structures Mobilization, administration & contingency $ 15,500 $ 3.000 $ 164,000 $ 34,200 $ 17,500 $ 169.700 Phase 55 total $ 403,900 Jg~1~;\i!lI~~i;~j . -- - .:--: ~--'>;:"'-" . '.... ~ . . ,z -.. .' .~-_: ;:-;... ' . +~:.. . ~: .~., " - ...: . ..,....; . .... - . '" .. , , . : :. "~..,. _. r.'- ." _ ~ "':i ...- ". -::);,:'->-- Phase I Interim Park (6'\ ~) ,Acquire Dublin Square site (not indLded in cost estimate - for acquisition costs. see Section 4.1). '''7::'\ <) Demolish existing Dublin Square sropping center; parking lots and bank building. (Hazardous material removal and archeological resource monitoring not included in cost estimate.) (i) Recycle building waste, asphalt am ~ b:1se. . r:---. i~j Maintain existing drainage inficlstructure. Cap, extend and add risers as necessary. (101 .:.:;/ Obtain additional ~1I1cx:aBy from other parks projects. Reifade site to drain to existing catch basins and drains. Test top 6" cl ~ for herbicide residue. (11") Constru:t vvest parking bt vvith tem~ paving (to be paved OJer ~. in Phase 3). @ Install turf am temporary rotor irrigation SyStem on rest cl site. @i Constru:t pieces of streetscape abrid~ln Phase 55 to maintain property owner's access. Demolition Earthwork Drainage Paving Planting & irrigation Site furnishings & stn.lctures Mobilization. administration & contingency $ 1.162.300 $ 167.000 $ 33.000 $ 179.000 $ 329.700 $ 32,000 $ 1,379.500 Phase I total $3,281,SOO . RIH !AI'A' . Phase 2 Orchard Garden improvements @ Demolish portiun or tempol'''Y turf area. Adju>'t tempot'arv irrigation in remaining turf area as necessary. @ Re-grade Orch'lId Garden area and instaU drainage s.y"~em. @ ConstJ vet Pavilion ;tructure. @ In!.taIt On:haui Garden L1nckcape ftatures. iflduding: waDs. p;lving systems. sma" fount..:1in. picnic tables. tJ'ees ."d tree g..te<, planting area, b'''Khe;, plan' ound equipment. @ Utilize walkway to Oonlon Wiry and ,vest parking lot as staging and ,u..:cess ill eas. backing out find! paving as coostllJt.tion finishes. Phase 3 Freshwater Comer improvements and lawns @J Dernofish remaining temporary turf are" dOdtempOfdf"t ill igdtion. (g> Re-grade for lawm, lOulltain area ilud ..;ornet entry ptaza. InstaH new drain:; fot" lawns and tie tel exi~til1g systp.m. Q.D InstaB inte,'.Ktive fountain. steps. entrY monument walls and pergola. ~,ucturE'. @) ConstnJCt '[;!go. @ InstaU irrig<lticn syst~m. Idwn, trees dlld c)thf"r plantin~. @ Re. pave west pil/~ing lot to repair wedf il/od teil/' during Pho;es 1-3. . Phase 4 Cemetery expansion @ Acqu,'e Dublhl Historic Ptesetvation Association site (not included In cost estimate - lOr at.qWsition costs. 'it."e Section 4.1). @ Protect existing n'ee', grade site il/xl .mtall drainage. @ Constrtlct bridge footings 30d in.<tlII pre-fabricated steel I wood b.idge. @ Construrt fr"",va~ sound wall and colllmbarium $l.nrrture. @ Instilll inigation. paV"g. plalltings. lawn and s~e furniture. rJI Ct.~ ~e .ar..-pt"(JJ;tr"liilt~ w for p1wmu-r{ pl.Irp\l>es QnlY. E.'tlfllate ba!~j 'Xi cortc:eptu<d ~ -n:I April2:)QO cmlf..ln1 do-ei"'.o1 indUll-e ~un whi:..h tlu)" le$I~t 1i'Ot1l p1'it>t:t1I.Ol'ISb1JChun. ::xht;:r IX't,=,'lti-d ":0$15 r.olll'Kluded in this es"Jn"lte are Nati~ Amf.m:-!n oore"...ert 3f\d IUlar~ -r1obWaoon, 3dministrd'lf)Il & contingen'Y~ COI1!d1Il!: pr~ir.lrtS b "Jf'ltran~,II" IT;Ol.ik!.:w.1n! 10%). ::onstnJr.bon conr.ngeJu.y (I ~%) ;sod deo:lg~ contJn~-=I1CY ~-2="-~1 il$ ~I.:en~e$ Of cooslnJdlon blJdfet. d$ 'h~I;K de-sif.'l ~ and at:, Qninlsva\lOfl costs (15% ot ~~ ~ budget). AI nurnl Demolition Earthwork Drainagt' Pa..ing Planting & irrigation Site furnishings & s[t'uctlJres Mobilization. adnlinistration & contingenc)' $ 33.400 $ 13.500 $ 106,500 $ 837,UOO $ 111,900 $ 1,371.bOO $ 1.541.900 Phase 1 total $ 4,016,800 $ $ $ $ $ Site fur nishings & structures $ Mobilizatioll. Jdmil)f~1rat\Ofl & contingellCY $ 193.200 65.300 3,400 210.200 229,000 4M.600 845.000 DemolitiOlI Earthwork D. ail klge Paving Plallting & iOlgi.lti0n Phase 3 total $1,010.700 Derno~tion Ealthwurk Drainage Paving Planting & irrigation Site fumi!::bill&'~ &: structure'). Mobilization. admirnstration & contingel1<.Y $ 1,000 $ 11.600 $ 13.800 $ 155.600 $ 24,500 $ 1.204.700 $ 1.023. 100 Phase 4 total $ 1,434,300 III ... s z I 18 I~ c ~ ~ , ~! ~j ~~~l ....... o I ! i i zl ~ 9i"f ~ ~~ 'l:I.l 1;"7 10 ~ ;~ ~ ~ ~ or "9 0:1'" u ~ ~ .g ~ .~ t S-.2 ~ v';" '!~'o 'l.H ~~ t51~ 5;~,~ 1. ~ 6 ~ e I I I I ~ ~ . g I~ i ~Iii Q.;I tI: ~) ~Ii '!{ ~~ c' , ~Iil ~~ j ~rg € ~I~ n ~Ig ~ ~ ~I~ ~ l ~!~ ~ ~ ~;~ j E ~ ~~Hl I I Ii wll :1 3 ~ ~ ~l;i ~ iE - r ~ r. - "f \.f c; IF .J @) I ! I I i 0:1 z j.: ;; ~I'~ ~I ~:i :::1 <.:) 1 ci z..... ...' ~5 ~ii! 11 , l e 0) -, ~! ~llt! t5.!~ () l6 o :} :;, 61~ ~ o i1t ~ ~Ii ~ :;;IH J'J;) J - (d .. ~ ~ ~ I p ~ j~ ~ ~ ~ t:: ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ s ~~~~ r;;~1J! (::) ~ ;; <i- ll' ~ ~ C n 0;' ~ H~ 2 :1)1:; l:J ~ >-IE % e DO h ~~ ~qB ~lJ",B e ~ ~ )" K~ ~ ,,~ ~I ~Jl (51 2t~ ~ ;<;: ~I~ ~ ~~H \~: e ---- ~ w )S J: IH 11i ~.. I"n . - ~I.~t a:!"";! ~l~ ; :I'1'" ~In (~ I~ 1'.5 ~ iI II iEl~ ~IU f-.... 1:111 5icJk :it!;1 ~ ~I~ ~ ~~!H ~"H ~) (j) I ~ ~l ! "'I . ~l;... ~ ~I'~$ <<,'\1 .r: ~H ).. ~ <!:! ffl ;; ~ ~IP l'i\Si ~.~ ~ "7 ],-g ~I,d @ ] ~g '" ., i: 1: . .;,: ;~ ';,\>~i ~, b 36 EO; ~5 l;; ~ "' w 5 ~ . w " ,1 ~ n- -+- -- ~ ii J .. QI 0 ~ , o's~f- . M """'!t!J'/"Vf ~ ::J \.? u:: . . . ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards and Hazardous HydrologylWater Quality Land Use/ Planning Materials Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/ Circulation Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of SiQnificance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: x I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environrrent, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. . Signature: y-&~> L/t-- Date: May 25,2006 Printed Name: Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner For: City of Dublin Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 15 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 4-." ~.. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS . Scope of the.Environmental Assessment This environmental assessment addresses the potential impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment, proposed Specific Plan, proposed Parks and Recreation Master Plan Amendment, and proposed implementation of the Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The scope of review includes only potential impacts resulting from development of the facilities described in the above documents. Any potential site-specific environmental impacts not anticipated during this environmental review will need to be addressed as part of an application submittal consistent with CEQA requirements. Additionally, any development in the project area that is outside the scope of this document may need further analysis if it can be determined that potential environmental impacts exist. The method of environmental analysis includes a review to determine whether the impact related to the City's evaluation criteria would be: potentially significant; less than significant unless mitigation is incorporated; less than significant; or no impact. The analysis includes a summary of the affected environment and a review of the threshold for determining significance. The evaluation of potential impacts applies the threshold, determines significance and, if necessary, includes recommended mitigation measures. Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts: 1. Determination based on Staff review of the project. 2. Determination based on field visit and site inspection. 3. Determination based on communication with appropriate City of Dublin departments and utility service . providers 4. Determination based on the City of Dublin General Plan (1985, updated to 2002). 5. Determination based on the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. 6. Determination based on the Archeological Assessment Report for the Donlon Way Area Specific Plan (prepared by William Self Associates, Inc.) August 2003. 7. Determination based on the Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project (Final) (prepared by Page and Turnbull, Inc.) January 2004. 8. Determination based on the Dublin Village Design Guidelines (prepared by RBF Consulting/Urban Design Studio) January 2005. 9. Determination based on the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form completed for the Dublin Heritage Center (prepared by Elizabeth Isles and Amanda Wells, City of Dublin) September 2004. 10. Determination based on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update (2004) and accompanying Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, approved by the Dublin City Council on March 16,2004, Resolution Numbers 48-04 and 49-04. 11. Determination based on the Draft Dublin Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan (prepared by Royston, Hanamoto, Alley, and Abey) May 2006 12. Determination based on the Draft. Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (prepared by the City of Dublin Community Development Department) May 2006 . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 16 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . ." 13. Determination based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for 11759 Dublin Boulevard (prepared by Treadwell & Rollo Environmental and Geotechnical Consultants for the benefit of Meyers Nave Riback Silver and Wilson) January 2005 Notes: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impacr answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impacr answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a projec~specific screening analysis). All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including of-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, Less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. "Negative Declaration: Less than significant with mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect rom "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earler Analyses,. may be cross- referenced). Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this tase, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than significant with mitigaticn Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address sit&specific conditions for the project. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should nonnally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a projecrs environmental effects in whatever format is selected. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance On the following page, the source of determination is listed in parenthesis. See listing of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist. Copies of the documents referenced in this document are available for public review at the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568. Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic'Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 17 of 42 May 25, 2006 Aesthetics Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 11, 12) a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ' d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ...~ 1'\..,' Potentially Less than Less than No Impact Signifi~nt significant Significant Impact with Impact mitiaation X X X X . a-c) Have a significant impact on scenic vista, damage to scenic resource, degrade visual character of the site? No imoact. The project area is not located in an area with any scenic corridor or scenic vista designation, so there will not be any impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. The project will not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site, but will instead improve and enhance the area with substantial public improvements, including the expansion of the City's Heritage Center and related streetscape improvements. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? . Less than sionificant imoact. The proposed project will involve the installation of new light fixtures in and around the Dublin Historic Park and related streetscape improvements, but it will not be in excess of the existing lighting on the current 4.2-acre shopping center site, which will be removed to make way for the future parl<. Therefore, the new lighting that is installed will be less than existing with the removal of the existing shopping center lighting when the center is demolished, and the new lighting will not adversely affect daytime or nighttime views. It is standard practice that a photometric study is provided with final construction drawings for any project prior to the issuance of an electrical permit. Adherence to this practice when construction documents are prepared for any project will ensure that the impact of new site lighting will be less-than-significant. This requirement will apply to all future development proposals in the project area. Agricultural Resources Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 5) a) Convert Prime Fannland, Unique Fannland or Fannland of Statewide Importance, as showing on the maps prepared pursuant to the Fannland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use, or a Williamson Act contract? Potentially Significant Impact Less than significant with mit'ation Less than Significant Impact No Impact X X . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 18 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . Agricultural Resources Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 5) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use? .I' Potentially Significant impact tess.than Significant Impact No tInpact Less than significant with miff ation x No Impact. The project area does not contain any properties that are currently used for agriculture or farming, nor does the project area contain any properties with Williamson Act contracts or any farmland that would be converted to a non-agricultural use. There are six properties in the project area that have an Agricultural zoning designation, and of those six,five are contained in the proposed Historic Park expansion area (Assessor Parcel Numbers 941-1560-001-01, 941-1560-001-02, 941~1560-003-03, 941-1560-005, and 941-1560-006) and three are the subject of General Plan land use changes from Retail/Office to ParkslPublic Recreation (APNs 941-1560-003- 03, 941-1560-005, and 941-1560-006) to accommodate the implementation of the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. The park use proposed on the parcels (which fall into the community facility and cemetery use categories for purposes of zoning classification) are permitted in an Agricultural zoning district, so the proposed project does not conflict with the zoning and has no detrimental impact to agricultural resources. . Air Quality (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district may be relied on to make the following determinations). Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 12) . a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerabe net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal orstate ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Less than Less than Nblmpact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitigation X X X X X Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 19 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 The project site is located within the Tri-Valley area, a sheltered, inland area surrounded by hills to the west, south and east. Most of the airflow into the southern portions of the Valley is accomplished through two gaps in the hills: . the Hayward and Niles canyons. Local wind data show the frequent occurrence of low wind speed and calm conditions (the latter approximately 23 percent of the time). These local limitations on the capacity for horizontal dispersion of air pollutants combined with the regional characteristic of restricted vertical dispersion give the area a high potential for regional air quality problems. However, given the nature of the proposed project and the lack of land use intensification proposed, the overall impact to the region's air quality from this project will be less than significant. a-b) Would the project conflict or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan or violate any air quality standards? Less than sianificant with mitiaation and Less than sianificant impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the local Clean Air Plan adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, because the land use changes being proposed will actually result in a de-tensification of land uses (from Retail/Office to ParkslPublic Recreation) and there are limited new facilities proposed in the area as part of the proposed Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. Air quality impacts result from two main sources: temporary impacts due to project construction and long-term impacts due to project operation. Generally, air quality impacts from project operation are based on vehicular emission from traffic. Project implementation will first involve the redesignation of five parcels from Retail/Office to Parks/Public Recreation, acquisition of those properties, and then the eventual demolition of approximately 40,000 square feet of commercial space to accommodate the development of the Historic Parle In terms of potential air . quality impacts due to project operation, the proposed project will actually reduce the square footage of actual and potential development in the project area, which will reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by and to the project area, which will reduce the overall vehicle miles traveled and vehicle emissions. See Table 1 below for a summary of the proposed land use changes and how they will impact the overall development potential in the project area. TABLE 1: MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL IN THE PROJECT AREA (Existing development acreage and square footage from the Alameda County Assessor's Office - current as of March 2006) SP/GP land use Amount of existing Amount of proposed Floor to Area Ratio or Development Difference category development acreage in project number of dwelling Potential area units Retail/Office 182,306 square feet 11 acres .25 to .60 FAR Up to 287,496 SF +105,190 SF on 18.55 acres Med/High Density 150,656 sf (176 8.28 acres 14-25 units/acre Up to 207 units +31 units Res. units) on 8.28 acres Business Park! 56,054 square feet 8.95 acres .30 to.40 FAR Up to 154,202 SF +98,148 SF Industrial on 8.95 acres Parks/Public 4,904 square feet on 9.91 acres No development 5,704 SF * +800 SF Recreation 2.36 acres intensity noted Total 243,264 SF and . 446,602,SF +203;338 SF 176 units on -38 and 207 units and +31 units acres * Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan proposes an 800 square foot pavilion/classroom building. . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 20 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . ~.. 0 '1 Although the development potential of the site is higher than the amount of existing development currently in the project area, that potential exists now under current general plan and zoning designations, without the proposed project. The proposed project will actually decrease the development potential in the area and thereby reduce the potential amount of vehicular trips generated and the air quality impacts of those vehicle miles traveled. In addition to there being less development potential with the proposed project and therefore fewer vehicle trips generated in the project area, parks and recreational facilities are typically not large traffic generators, they are not typically peak-hour trip generators, and vehicle trips are spread throughout the day on weekdays as well as weekends. The proposed Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan includes the construction of an outdoor classroom as well as an outdoor stage, but even with those facilities the amount of traffic generated will be less than significant when compared to the existing and/or potential development under the existing designations. In terms of construction-related impacts, it is anticipated that the project would generate temporary increases in dust and particulate matter caused by minor site excavation and grading activities as buildings and facilities in the area are constructed. Construction vehicle equipment on unpaved surfaces generates dust as would wind blowing over exposed earth surfaces. However, City regulations require that a project-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) be developed when the construction drawings for the Historic Park are prepared, which will also address air quality issues. The SWPPP will contain measures relating to the containment of fugitive dust during grading and construction activities, mandating that construction equipment be kept in proper running order, mandating that the developer is responsible for watering or other dust-palliative measures to control dust as conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer, and mandating the avoidance of construction waste burning to reduce short-term air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. Through the required SWPPP, the project shall implement dust control measures to reduce project dust deposition to acceptable levels. Dust control shall conform to the requirements of the SWPPP, which for the proposed Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, will be developed by the Parks and Community Services Development Staff in cooperation with the City's Public Works Staff. Adherence to the following mitigation measure for all construction projects in the project area will ensure that the impacts of construction are less than significant: Mitiaation Measure 1: In accordance with City regulations, a proiect-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Proaram (SWPPP) shall be prepared in compliance with the City's NPDES permit. The SWPPP shall have the followina minimum requirements: 1. Active construction areas will be watered daily and more frequently if necessary. 2. All trucks haulina soil. sand or other loose materials shall be covered. 3. Water shall be applied dailv, or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parkina areas, and exposed stockpiles at construction sites. 4. All access roads and parkina areas at construction sites shall be swept daily with water sweepers. When any building in the Project area is proposed to be demolished, the Applicant or Contractor will be required to obtain a demolition permit from the City of Dublin. Part of the City's permit process is to require the Applicant or Contractor to provide notification of the demolition to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and provide the BAAQMD with the results of a survey to determine if there is Asbestos Containing Material in the Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 21 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 v~. , ' - structures to be demolished. If there is ACM in the structure(s), additional BAAQMD regulations apply. A job number is issued by the BAAQMD before a demolition permit can be issued by the City, which will ensure that all . requirements of the BAAQMD are followed and that the air quality impacts of the demolition will be less than significant. c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable air pollutants? Less than sianificant impact. The BAAQMD has established thresholds for determining whether a given project . has the potential for significant air quality impacts. If a project exceeds the thresholds, detailed air quality analyses are usually required. If the project does not exceed the thresholds, it is typically assumed to have a less than significant impact on air quality. BAAQMD does not usually recommend a detailed air quality analysis for projects generating less than 2,000 vehicle trips per day. Implementing the proposed project will not generate significant additional amounts of traffic, as described above. Vehicular emissions are estimated to be less than is currently permitted with the existing land use categories and the existing buildings, and no cumulatively considerable air pollutants are expected to be generated. . Overall, the air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would be below the standard of air quality significance as established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District since no intensification of land use is proposed. d, e) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations or create objectionable odors? Less than sianificant impact. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District defines sensitive receptors as . facilities where sensitive receptor population groups (children, the elderly, the acutely ill and the chronically ill) are likely to be located. These land uses include residences, schools, playgrounds, child-care centers, hospitals and medical clinics. This project would involve construction and development of a new park and recreational facility where people would gather for recreation, among other facilities which could be developed at a later date. The proposed Historic Park is not located in the vicinity of any significant generators of pollutants such as a factory or agricultural operation, but portions of the park are located adjacent to Interstate 580, which carries a significant amount of traffic and produces pollution and odors from vehicle emissions. However, the Historic Park Draft Master Plan includes the construction of a freeway sound wall incorporated into the project design, which will serve to shield the future park space from freeway noise, as well as air quality impacts. The portion of the Historic Park that will be closest to the freeway will be the cemetery expansion area. That is not an area that children, the elderly, the acutely ill and the chronically ill will typically gather for long periods of time, so limited impacts to sensitive receptors in the proposed project area are anticipated. Additionally, the cemetery expansion area is where the combination columbarium/soundwall is proposed to be constructed, which will serve to shield cemetery visitors from both the noise and air quality impacts of the adjacent freeway. Therefore, the overall impact of significant pollutant concentrations or objectionable odors is anticipated to be less than significant. . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendmen~ Page 22 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . Biological Resources Would the project: (Sources: 1,2,3,4, 11, 12) a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either direcUy through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse impact on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances? n Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitigation x x x x x x a-b) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly through habitat modifications, on any riparian habitat or species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than siqnificant with mitiqation. A majority of the project area is already urbanized and therefore the potential for impacts to flora or fauna are very limited. However, Dublin Creek runs through a portion of the project area, and there is a possibility that a candidate, sensitive, or special status species is in the creek that could be impacted by the construction of the proposed project. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) contains records for nine special-status animal species in the vicinity of the project area. California tiger salamander (Ambystoma califomiense), California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonil), and Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) are federally listed as threatened, while San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) is federally listed as endangered. San Joaquin kit fox and Alameda whipsnake are also state-listed as threatened. The five remaining animal species are considered Species of Special Concern by the CDFG: burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), California homed lark (Eremophila Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 23 of 42 May 25, 2006 J . alpestris actia), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), American badger (Taxidea taxus), and western pond turtle . (Emys marmorata). Two special-status plant species have been recorded in the greater Dublin area: Diablo helianthella (Relianthel/a castanea) and Congdon's tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonil) (CNDDB 2006). It is unknown whether either of these species exist in the project area. However, due to the limited amount of construction proposed for the area immediately adjacent to Dublin Creek; primarily hardscape improvements, including a walkway and future cemetery plots, there would be a less-than- significant impact on biological resources with the mitigation measure below as no sensitive or special-status species or riparian features will be disturbed or destroyed in the project area. There are several guiding policies of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update that will ensure that impacts to biological resources resulting from project implementation are minimized. Guiding Policy 3.1 requires the creation of continuous visual open spaces, which are valuable for both recreational opportunities as well as habitat protection. Guiding Policy 3.2 encourages the protection of riparian corridors and oak land areas so that they will contribute to the ecological health of the open space system. Guiding Policy 3.6 emphasizes the protection of wildlife habitats and corridors and cooperation with the State Department of Fish and Game to define and preserve wildlife habitats. Adherence to these policies of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the other mitigation measure identified below will ensure that the park development portion of the project's potential impacts to Dublin's biological resources are less than significant. Mitiaation Measure 2: A bioloaical survey shall be conducted by a Qualified bioloaist prior to any disturbance within 150 feet of Dublin Creek (Le aradina, construction of nearby pathways. construction of the creek foot bridoe) and on the undeveloped DHPA parcel to verify that no special species are located in the area proposed for park expansion. Reaulatorv permits shall be obtained as necessary from the Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Enaineers, or State Water Resources Control Board as necessary. and in coniunction with the recommendations of the bioloaical report. . c) Have a substantial adverse impact on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other means? Less than sionificant with mitiaation. There are minimal alterations proposed to Dublin Creek in the project area. The Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan shows plans for a footbridge to connect the existing Pioneer Cemetery with the cemetery expansion area on the south side of Dublin Creek. The Master Plan, which is a conceptual-level document at this point, envisions using a prefabricated steel structure that is 88 feet in length and 12 feet wide. The concrete footings will be designed to minimally impact the riparian area, but the specifics won't be known until the bridge engineering is done at the stage when a construction bid is prepared. At that time, the potential impacts of the footbridge footings can be more accurately assessed and the City can work with the relevant regulatory agencies to ensure that the impacts to the riparian corridor are less than significant. Mitigation Measure 3: As detailed enaineerina is developed for the desian of the footinas for the pedestrian footbridae over Dublin Creek as envisioned in the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. the City shall work with the appropriate reaulatory aaencies to ensure that impacts to the creek are minimized and addressed to the . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 24 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update. Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . .. . ./ A ~ satisfaction of the aaencv. For the most part, the creek is proposed to be left in its natural state without any impacts to water quality through stormwater runoff or discharge, which will be retained and recharged on site in the Historic Park area. Because there is no land use intensification being proposed in the project area, because each development proposal is reviewed by the City Public Works Staff for compliance with the City's NPDES permit, and because discharge into the City's stormwater system is minimized through site design, it is not anticipated that any substantial adverse impact would occur or that permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or Regional Water Quality Control Board would be required. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than sianificant impact. Because the creek and its associated flora is proposed to be left in its natural state; with the exception of the construction of the footbridge footings, no migration corridors should be interrupted. e-~ Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree protection ordinances or conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? Less than siQnificant impact and No impact. At this point, there are no trees proposed to be removed from the project area. A tree survey will be required as part of the detailed construction drawings for the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan. The tree survey will plot the location of any tree that is subject to the City's. Heritage Tree Ordinance and a tree removal permit would need to be obtained if a protected tree were proposed to be removed. Adherence to this requirement will ensure that the project's potential impacts to local policies and ordinances are negligible. Additionally, there are no adopted conservation plans in the project area with which the proposed project would be in conflict. Cultural Resources Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7,9, 11, 12) a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to Sec. 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature? Potentially Significant Impact No Impact Less than significant with mit;aation Less than Significant Impact x x x Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 25 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25,2006 ,...,.... '_" .r .... Cultural Resources Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7,9, 11, 12) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a fonnal cemetery? Potffntially Significant Impact Less than significant with miti1i1a,tkJ/J X Less than Significant Impa,ct No Impa~ . a) Cause substantial adverse change to a significant historic resource? Less than siQnificant. In 2003, the City contracted with architectural historians Page & Tumbull, Inc. to identify and map existing historic resources in the project area and to make recommendations for the continued preservation of those resources. The Historic Resources Identification Project (Final) was completed in January 2004 and it identified several resources that should be protected as development in the Dublin area continues. Some of these resources have special status at either the State or Federal level, and all of them are included in the Dublin Historic Resources Inventory, which is contained in the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan. Subsequent to the research conducted for the Historic Resources Identification Project, the Dublin Village Design Guidelines and the Historic Overlay Zoning District were adopted by the Dublin City Council (January and February 2005), which set forth the process to review new development in the project area and the guidelines under which modifications to identified historic resources would be considered. All development in the project area that impacts an identified historic resource, whether it be new construction or modifications to an existing building, should conform to the design guidelines (proposed to be incorporated as . Section 7 of the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan), which were based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Buildings. Any historical resource renovation or rehabilitation project that is done consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards can be classified as a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15331. At the time of any development application impacting an identified historic resource, Section 15064.5 (Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical and Unique Archeological resources) of the CEQA Guidelines shall be consulted and all requirements of this section are required by State law to be met in the course of reviewing and implementing the project. Additionally, compliance with Chapter 8.62 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance (Historic Overlay Zoning District) and the Design Guidelines (Section 7) of the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan will ensure that impacts to significant historic resources in the project area are less than significant. b-d) Cause substantial adverse change to significant archeological or paleontological resource or a unique geologic feature or disturb any human remains (either inside or outside a formal cemetery)? Less than sianificant with mitigation. In 2003, the City contracted with archeological firm William Self Associates, Inc. to identify and map archeological resources in the project area and to make recommendations for the continued preservation of those resources. The Archeological Assessment Report for the Donlon Way Area Specific Plan was completed in August 2003, and it summarized the type of and state of the archeological resources in the project area. Pursuant to a records . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 26 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . <, t search through the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), there were found to be eight archeological sites within a quarter mile radius of the area, although no previously recorded prehistoric sites were known within the project area boundaries itself. In addition to the records search through the NWIC, William Self Associates also conducted a pedestrian survey of the project area. The pedestrian survey resulted in the identification of one previously unrecorded historic resource within the area boundary at Alamilla Springs (the ,exact details of the discovery are kept confidential in order to ensure that the resource is not disturbed). The pedestrian survey was also successful in identifying Archeological High Probability areas within the project area boundaries. Based on the existence of the archeological resources within and adjacent to the project area, the City's consultants, as well as the NWIC, believe that there is a moderate to high probability of identifying Native American archeological resources and a high probability of encountering historic-period archeological resources when the ground within the project area is disturbed, particularly within a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek and within the general vicinity of St. Raymond's Church, Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Square Shopping Center site. Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines directs public agencies to avoid damaging effects on an archeological resource whenever possible. For a project that could impact an archeological resource, Section 15064.5 (Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical and Unique Archeological resources) of the CEQA Guidelines will be consulted and all requirements of this section shall be met in the course of reviewing and implementing the project. In order to mitigate any potential impacts to resources in the project area, further archival and field study by an archeologist shall be undertaken prior to the construction of any development projects in the area in accordance with the recommendations of the William Self Associates document (pages 25- 28) and in consultation with the Public Works Director and Community Development Director, as detailed below: Mitiaation Measure 4: In Hiqh ArcheoloqicalProbability Areas (includinq a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek and within the qeneral vicinity of St. Raymond's Church, Pioneer Cemetery, and the Dublin Square Shoppinq Center site), the permittinq of future qround disturbance shall include provisions for further archival and field study by an archeoloqist. archeoloqical testing and, if necessary, archeological monitorinq during construction. Mitiaation Measure 5: Should preconstruction excavation orborinqs be conducted outside of the High Archeological Probability Areas, but within the proiect area, a Qualified archeoloqist shall monitor the work to define the presence or absence of buried resources in order to promote advance planninQ for mitiqation purposes. Mitiaation Measure 6: If a Native American artifact or human remains are identified durinq any demolition or construction in the proiect area, work on the proiect shall cease immediately until those steps outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e) can be taken to the satisfaction of the Dublin Community Development Director. Proiect work may be resumed in compliance with the reQuirements of Section 15064.5 (e). Additionally, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code (relating to the discovery of Native American remains) should be implemented. Mitiaation Measure 7: If an archeoloqical. prehistoric. or paleontoloqical resource is discovered durinq any demolition or construction in the proiect area, work on the proiect shall cease immediately until a resource Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 27 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 -../<f l' -'../ ,--:. e' protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (f) is prepared by a qualified archeologist and approved by the Dublin Community Development Director. Proiect work may be resumed in compliance with such . plan. Mitiaation Measure 8: Future roadwork or subsurface construction and maintenance within the Donlon Way road right of way and the portion of Dublin Boulevard within the proiect area shall include protocol for inadvertent discoveries made during construction. including the development of a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (f). prepared by a qualified archeoloqist and approved by the Dublin Public Works and Community Development Directors. In the event of a discovery. proiect work may be resumed in compliance with such plan. The implementation of the above mitigation measures will ensure that the proposed project has a less than significant impact. Geology and Soils Would the project: . (Sources: 1,2,3,4, 13) a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault. as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other known evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- and off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 13-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste? Potentially LessJhan Less than No Impact Significant signifiqgnf SignifiOEint Impact With Impact mffLaation ,~ -, X X X X X X X X . The project area is located in the central portion of the Coast Ranges geomorphic province. The Coast Ranges are characterized by a series of parallel, northwesterly trending, folded and faulted mountain chains. Mt. Diablo is located approximately nine miles north of the City of Dublin. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fau/~ as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist or based on other known evidence of a) . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 28 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . ..... a known fault? Expose people to strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-re/ated"ground failure (including liquefaction), or landslides? Less than sianificant impact. Active earthquake faults within the region that influence earthquake susceptibility include the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras and Greenville Faults. The Calaveras Fault runs through Dublin generally along San Ramon Road, and has been traced to run across five of the properties within the project area, including APNs 941-0040-06-010 (Springs Apartments), 941-0040-06-016 (PetCo), 941-1550-01-012 (Shell Gas Station), 941-0'550-05-02 (Heritage Park Office Complex), and 941-0550-01-010 (Vacant CalTrans property). Eight additional properties in the project area are within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone, which is approximately 500 feet on either side of the fault itself. The properties within the Fault Zone are those listed above in addition to the following: .Parcet..Number 941-1550-001-02 941-1550-003-02 941-1550-004 . 941-1560-001-01 600 Donlon Wa 572 Donlon Wa No address No address 1$'. 11991 Dublin Boulevard 11891 Dublin Boulevard 11873 Dublin Boulevard 6506 Donlon Wa 941-1560-001-02 941-1560-002-02 941-1560-010-01 941-1550-002-02 Signed into law in 1972, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was signed into law with the intent to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Act requires that all residential construction within a fault zone has a comprehensive geologic investigation completed prior to building that shows that the fault does not pose a hazard to the proposed structure. Under moderate to severe seismic events, which are probable in the Bay Area, structures and facilities in the project area would be subject to damage caused by ground shaking. The General Plan contains policies in both the Conservation and Seismic Safety and Safety Element that will reduce the potential impact of ground failure and rupture. Adherence to these policies is required for any development in the City. Adherence to all requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act requirement that all construction plans in a fault zone incorporate the recommendations of a geotechnical investigation, will ensure that the project impacts are less than significant. It is a City standard that a registered Professional Engineer design the grading and foundation plans for any new construction. A Registered Geotechnical Engineer is is required to stamp and sign the grading and foundation plans certifying that they conform to the recommendations contained in the final geotechnical investigation, and this is verified when grading plans are reviewed and approved by the Building Division and the Public Works Department. Additionally, all structures proposed to be built within the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone will be subject to additional near-fault structural requirements and the plans will be reviewed by the Building Division through the plan check process. b-d) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or be located on expansive soil? Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 29 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 ::; ---. /' f:. . . Less than significant with mitigation. The project area is underlain by stiff to very stiff clay soil to a depth of approximately 20 feet below ground surface. At depths greater than 20 feet. soil varies from medium dense to dense clayey and silty sands. Properties in the project area have been previously disturbed, graded, and paved in many instances to accommodate buildings, parking areas, roads, and other public and private improvements. For any construction project that is proposed in the project area, the Applicant will be required to obtain a ,grading permit from the City, and approval of the permit will be based on compliance with standard City development procedures. . According to the United States Geologic Survey and the California State Department of Emergency Services, properties in the project area are all classified as having moderate susceptibility for ground liquefaction, as well as other seismic hazards. The following mitigation measure will serve to reduce the impacts of the project to less than significant: Mitiaation Measure 9: A site-specific soils reportlgeotechincal investigation shall be required for any development proposal in the proiect area and shall be conducted bv a California-registered geoloaist or a California-registered engineering geologist. The report shall address the potential for expansive soils and ground liauefaction. Specific measures to reduce seismic hazards, expansive soils, and liquefaction hazards to a less than significant level shall be included in the report and those measures shall be implemented as part of the site' development. e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste? No impact. The project area is served by a sewer system. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: (Sources: 1,2, 3,4, 6, 13) a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? . Potentially Less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitiaation x X X X . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area SpeCific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 30 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . .,- e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been adopted, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk .of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are .intermixed with wildlands? x x x x a-c) Create a significant hazard through transport of hazardous materials or release or emission of hazardous materials? Less than significant with mitigation. It is not anticipated that any uses would be permitted in the project area that would entail activities that involve hazardous chemicals in any fashion. However, should that ever be the case, such materials would need to be used and stored in accordance with permits issued by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, County Environmental Health Department and Alameda County Fire Department, so that a less-than-significant impact would therefore result. When demolition occurs in the area to implement the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, it shall be done in accordance with a City of Dublin demolition permit, which requires compliance with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) regulations. Because the shopping center proposed to be demolished was constructed in 1963, there is a possibility that either lead paint or asbestos is present in the building, both of which are considered hazardous materials. Adherence to the following mitigation measure will ensure that the presence and removal of those materials in that building, as well as any other building proposed to be demolished in the project area, has a less than significant impact on the environment. Mitigation Measure 10: Prior to demolition of any buildina in the proiect area. the buildina shall be sampled to determine if the buildina contains lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be present. they shall be handles and disposed of as a hazardous material and in compliance with all applicable local. state. and federal regulations. The project site is not within one quarter mile of an existing school. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Sec. 65962.5 and, as a resu/~ would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less than sionificant impact. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted for the Dublin Square Shopping Center site at 11759 Dublin Boulevard in January 2005, which is one of the properties within the project Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 31 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25. 2006 / area. The study found that there are several facilities within the City that appear on regulatory agency lists, but that no facilities appear to be affecting the environmental conditions in the project area itself. Properties in the . project area were used in the past for agricultural purposes, so there is a possibility that pesticidelherbicide contamination may be present near the surface I but it is not expected to be present in high levels due to the amount of time that has passed since agricultural operations were underway. e,t) Is the site located within an airport land use plan of a public airport or private airstrip? No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within the immediate vicinity of a public airport; therefore no impacts are anticipated regarding airport noise or crash hazards zones.> g,hJ Interference with an emergency evacuation plan, expose people and structures to a significant risk involving wildland fires, and are nearby residences intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The project site is not located in an area that is at risk involving wildland fires. Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: (Sources: 1,2,3, 4, 11, 12, 13) a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. the production rate of existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the aeration of the course qf a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration of a course or stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which wouid exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ~ Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 1 OO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? Potentially Less than Less than 1fl~/mpact Significant significant Significant Impact With Impact mitiaation X X X X X X X . . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 32 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13) h) Place within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area structures which impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? Potentially Significant Impact No Impact Less than significant with mUiaE!tion Less than Significant Impact x x x a-f) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, deplete groundwater resources, alter drainage patterns, effect surface or subsurface water quality, result in placing housing in a flood plain? Less than siqnificant impact. The City of Dublin is a co-permittee of the Alameda County Clean Water Program, which is a coordinated effort by local governments in the County to improve water quality in San Francisco Bay. In 1994, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a set of recommendations for New and Redevelopment Controls for Storm Water Programs. These recommendations include policies that define watershed protection goals, minimum non-point source pollution controls for site planning and post construction activities. Watershed protection goals are based on policies identified in the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Control Plan, which relied on Best Management Practices (BMPs) to limit pollutant contact with stormwater runoff at its source and remove such pollutants prior to being transported into receiving waters. Any development project in the City of Dublin requires the preparation of a project-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP), ensuring that any surface water quality pollution impacts will be less-than-significant. As the implementation of the Historic Park Draft Master Plan is executed, one of the first phases of the project will be to demolish the existing Dublin Square Shopping Center site and remove the vast parking fields that surround the buildings. The removal of the buildings and the conversion of a shopping center site from a commercial use to a park use will reduce the amount of impervious surface in the project area. Park sites typically have a lot of pervious surface area, which allows for groundwater recharge and minimizes the potential for wastewater to drain off the site. Additionally, the City will prepare a project-specific SWPPP which will address the development of the Historic Park in particular. For other properties in the project area, development proposals will be reviewed by the City's Public Works Department to ensure that storm water runoff from the site is kept to a minimum through careful site design and on- site retention and recharge. The development of any new facilities in the project area will require that the project conforms to Alameda County Flood Control and Water Quality District, Zone 7 requirements and will meet the water quality standards of the City of Dublin's NPDES permit and the Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program. The future developer will be responsible for obtaining all permits necessary from Zone 7 prior to construction, and follow all provisions of the City's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and the Water Quality Control Board requirements, listing Best Management Practices that reduce the potential for water quality degradation during construction and post-construction activities. Implementation of these required actions ensures that surface water quality pollution is a less than significant impact. Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 33 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25,2006 J~ ., , . I Water to the proposed project would be supplied by the Dublin San Ramon Services District, relying on long-term contracts for imported water to the site. There would therefore be no impacts to groundwater supplies. . g-j) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? Less than skmificant impact and no impact. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map published by FEMA (Community Panel Number 060705-0001 B), a bulk of the project area is located within a 50D-year flood zone while a few of the parcels closest to Dublin Creek are within the 1 OD-year flood hazard area. The properties that are within the 100-year flood hazard area are those that are proposed to be included in the Historic Park. The Historic Park area currently has two buildings that are in the flood hazard area, one being a church and the other a classroom/meeting/exhibit space. Neither of the buildings is used for residential purposes. The only new building proposed to be constructed in the Historic Park area is one 800 square foot pavilion/classroom building, which will be used intermittently and not for residential purposes. Therefore, the flood impacts to people or structures will be less than significant. Land Use and Planning Would the project: (Sources: 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12) a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitiaation X X X . a) Physically divide an established community? No impact. The project area is within an urbanized portion of Dublin and implementation of the project will not serve to physically divide the community in any fashion. The redesignation of parcels in the area from a Retail/Office General Plan land use category to Parks/Public Recreation will allow for the logical expansion of the City's Heritage Center and the development of a cohesive Historic Park. This will help to unify the City's historic core by connecting several of the City's historic buildings, archeological resources, and former historic sites into a single public space. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation? Less than siqnificant impact. The proposed project includes changes to several planning documents, including: . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 34 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . // r; . Amendment to the General Plan land use designation for five properties in the project area; · Amendment to the Zoning Map for two properties in the project area; . Adoption of the Draft Dublin Village Histone Area Specific Plan; . Amendment to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update (2004) · Adoption of the Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan Approval of these changes ensures consistency between the proposed project and the City plans and regulations. c) Conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No impact. No such plan has been adopted within the project area. There would, therefore, be no impact to a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Mineral Resources Would the project (Sources: 1, 2, 4) a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general Plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Pot~ntial1y Significa11t Impact Less than Significant Impact :No Impact Less than significant with miti ation x x No impact. The Conservation Element of the General Plan does not reference any significant mineral resources in the City, nor are any properties within the project area designated by the California State Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, as having deposits of minerals. Additionally, no mineral resources are shown on the State of California's maps of such resources, and therefore no impacts are expected as a result of project implementation. Noise Would the project result in: (Source: 1,2, 3,4,5, 7, 11, 12) a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project? Potentiaffy Less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significa11t Impact with Impact mjfiqati(Jf1 X X X X Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 35 of 42 May 25, 2006 . -'..... f..r_ Noise Would the project result in: (Source: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working n the project area to excessive noise levels? n For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact miJioE!tioJ) X X . The General Plan identifies that the normally acceptable maximum outdoor Ldn noise level is 60 dBA for neighborhood parks, and up to 65 dBA as conditionally acceptable. Noise measurements are expressed in decibels ("dBAIt), which is the standard measure of sound pressure. New recreation facilities will need to be located in areas where the noise exposure level was not higher than 65 dBA in order to be in conformance with the General Plan. a-f) Would the project expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established by the General Plan or other applicable standard, expose people to groundbome vibration, result in permanent increases in ambient noise levels? Less than significant impact. There are two possible noise impacts resulting from the proposed project: construction noise and operational noise. Construction noise is generated when a new facility is being built. Operational noise occurs when the facility is completed and is being used for its intended purpose. Operational noise is not expected to be a significant impact of any new park, residential buildfng, office complex, commercial building, or business park because such noises generated are compatible with a suburban environment and will be mitigated at the project level by the conditions of approval for the project consistent with the City's noise standards. Such conditions typically include prohibitions on amplified sounds outside of the building and the like. Construction noise would be present at the time any new structure or facility is built, and short-term construction related noise could be expected. The City has adopted common practices for all construction and grading operations, and which are included in the construction documents for any construction project, to limit the hours of construction to 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, including the idling of equipment, unless the Director of Public Works approves alternative hours. Additionally, all equipment used on the construction site is to be in good, well-maintained condition, and mufflers. to minimize noise generation that could affect the residents in the project area. Therefore, noise-related impacts of the project will be less-than-significant. While there are limited noise impacts expected to be generated by the proposed project. there are existing noise impacts in the project area due to the proximity of Interstate 580 and the vehicular noise generated from that facility. One of the components of the Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan is to install a soundwall along the freeway in a portion of the project area to reduce noise impacts to the existing Heritage Center and the,future Historic Park expansion area. The soundwall will minimize noise impacts to future users of the Historic Park and cemetery expansion area and will improve the existing conditions near the Pioneer Cemetery, Murray Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 36 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . . . . I V ((,.,",.,... Schoolhouse, St. Raymond's Church, and the Dublin Creek Kennel/Hagan residence area. Although the General Plan does not contain noise exposure standards for an unique recreational/civic facility like the Historic Park, with the installation of the soundwall and the improvement that will provide to current noise impacts in the area, the impacts of the project will be less than significant, and in fact,will improve the situation. Additionally, the project area is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or within the boundaries of an airport land use plan area. Population and Housing Would the project: (Sources: 1,4, 12) a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the replacement of housing elsewhere? Potentially Less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mltjgatiQn X X / X No impact. Implementation of the proposed project will not induce additional growth in Dublin, as no new residential units are proposed that are not currently permitted under the existing project area General Plan land use designations and Zoning Districts. Therefore, no population growth impacts are anticipated that have not already been assessed in the General Plan. The implementation of the proposed project will not displace any existing housing units or people, and therefore the project will have no impact. Public Services (Sources: 1, 3, 4, 11, 12) a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Potenti~lIy Less than Less than 1JI~. Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitiaation X X X X X No Impact. Implementation of the 'proposed project will not create additional need for new public services or facilities, as there is no land use intensification being proposed. Any new facilities constructed in the project area Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 37 of 42 May 25, 2006 III will be required to meet the requirements of the Alameda County Fire Department. Dublin Police Department, Dublin Unified School District, and other applicable governmental agencies during the plan review phase and any . project-specific concerns could be addressed at that point, including an analysis that adequate response times can be met as necessary. Any future development projects in the area will pay impact fees appropriate to the type of project. Recreation (Sources: t 3,4, 10, 11, 12 a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Significant Impact Less than significant wfth miti ation Less than Significant Impact No Impact x x No Impact. The proposed project does not include residential development that is not already anticipated under the General Plan, so there would be no increase in the need for or impact on recreational facilities. The project Would add a much'-needed recreational facility to the Dublin community, thereby increasing the City's recreational resources and facilities to serve the community. No adverse impact related to recreational facilities will result, but rather, the park development will provide more recreational activities and facilities for the public's use. . This Initial Study is studying the impacts of developing a new park in the project area and the possible effects on the environment that the park might have, but the proposed project in and of itself will not have a negative impact on recreational facilities in the project area, and in fact will create additional recreational opportunities. Transportation and Traffic Would the project: (Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, 12) a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment? Potentially Less than Less than No Impact S;gnificant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitjaation X X X X . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning Page 38 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . Transportation and Traffic Would the project: (Sources: 1,2,3,4, 11, 12) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (such as bus turnouts and bicycle facilities)? . ; /.. Potentially Less than Less thEm No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mitiQaticm X X X No impacts. No impacts are anticipated with regard to traffic or parking for the proposed project. Existing and proposed roadway improvements have been designed and sized to provide adequate transportation facilities and transit modes with sufficient capacity for the existing and proposed uses. No land use intensification is proposed for properties in the project area, though there is the capacity for the overall maximum development potential in the area to increase due to the fact that many of the sites are currently developed at less than the maximum intensity permitted in the General Plan, as discussed in the previous section on Air Quality.. However, all of this capacity exists today, without the land use changes proposed in the Specific Plan (which actually decreases the development potential because of the shift from Retail/Office to ParkslPublic Recreation), and recreational facilities - even those with classroom and small outdoor stage facilities - are typically not large traffic generators. They are typically not peak-hour trip generators, and are primarily local- serving. Vehicle trips are spread throughout the day, and in fact the concentration of trips tends to be during non- peak hour times such as afternoons, evenings, and weekends, which minimizes potential impacts to the city circulation systems. Additionally, both the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and the Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan call for several public improvements to be made to the streets and sidewalks in the project area, which will increase pedestrian safety. Adequate parking for the proposed Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan is proposed, including the construction ofa new parking lot and the addition of on-street parking on Donlon Way, and therefore, no adverse impacts relative to parking are anticipated. Utilities and Service Systems Would the project (Sources: 1,3,4, 11, 12) a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Potentially less than Less than No Impact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact . mitiaation X X X . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 39 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25,2006 Utilities and Service Systems Would the project (Sources: 1,3,4, 11, 12) d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing water entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ., +. Potentially Less than Less than No lTir4pact Significant significant Significant Impact with Impact mit!g;$iPn X X X X . No impact. The following service providers serve the project: . Electrical and natural gas power: Pacific Gas and Electrical Company . Water supply and sewage treatment: Dublin San Ramon Services District . Storm Drainage: City of Dublin . Solid waste disposal: Amador Valley Industries The proposed project will not result in a demand for new water and wastewater services for potable or irrigation water, because no land use intensification is proposed for properties in the project area and existing service . infrastructure can be used. It is not anticipated that utility service beyond that which is already provided to the area will be required. As is typically the case with new development applications in the City, individual development proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by City Staff as well as utility providers to ensure that services can be provided as needed. It is not anticipated that development in the project area will require the extension of additional services, and the impacts to utilities and service systems will not be significant. Future development in the project area will be consistent with General Plan policies, allowing necessary utilities and services to be provided without significant impact. When construction drawings are submitted for specific future projects, City Departments and other governmental agencies will review plans in accordance with adopted regulations to determine feasibility and suitability. . Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Potentially Less than L.essthan No Impact Significant significant Signific~nt Impact with Impact mitigation X . Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and AJea Rezoning Page 40 of 42 May 25, 2006 . . . -' #' ~. ! 1'> ()' t.:,r b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. either directly or indirectly? x x a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environmen~ substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than siQnificant with mitiQation. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment with the incorporation of all mitigation measures as proposed. The implementation of all stated mitigation measures will ensure that any potential impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No. Although incremental increases in certain areas can be expected as a result of the implementation of the proposed project. the implementation of all stated mitigation measures will ensure that any potential impacts are ' mitigated to a less than significant level. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No such impacts have been discovered in the course of preparing this Initial Study. Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area SpeCific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 41 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 LI- ~, BACKGROUND INFORMA liON INITIAL STUDY PREPARER Kristi Bascom, Senior Planner, City of Dublin Community Development Department AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study: City'of Dublin, Community Development Department City of Dublin, Parks and Community Services Department City of Dublin, Public Works Department Dublin San Ramon Services District REFERENCES ,~ . Archeological Assessment Report for the Donlon Way Area Specific Plan (prepared by William Self Associates, Inc.) August 2003. City of Dublin General Plan (1985, updated to 2002). . City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Draft Dublin Draft Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan (prepared by Royston, Hanamoto, Alley, and Abey) May 2006 Draft Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan (prepared by the City of Dublin Community Development Department) May 2006 Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project (Final) (prepared by Page and Turnbull, Inc.) January 2004. Dublin Village Design Guidelines (prepared by RBF Consulting/Urban Design Studio) January 2005. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form completed for the Dublin Heritage Center (prepared by Elizabeth Isles and Amanda Wells, City of Dublin) September 2004. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update (2004) and accompanying Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for 11759 Dublin Boulevard (prepared by Treadwell & Rollo Environmental and Geotechnical Consultants for the benefit of Meyers Nave Riback Silver and Wilson) January 2005 Initial Study for the Draft Dublin Village Historic kea Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Page 42 of 42 Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Area Rezoning May 25, 2006 . . . Mitigation Monitoring Program Checklist Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Ma Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning Mitigation Measure One time or Responsible for Responsibl~ On oin 1m lementation Verificatic Mitigation Measure 1: In accordance with City regulations, a project- Through the end PW PW specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) shall be of construction. prepared in compliance with the City's NPDES permit. The SWPPP shall have the following minimum requirements: 1. Active construction areas will be watered daily and more frequently if necessary. 2. All trucks hauling soil, sand or other loose materials shall be covered. 3. Water shall be applied daily, or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and exposed stockpiles at construction sites. 4. All access roads and parking areas at construction sites shall be swe t dail with water swee ers. Mitigation Measure 2: A biological survey shall be conducted by a One time prior to PL and PCS PL qualified biologist prior to any disturbance within 150 feet of Dublin Creek grading or (Le grading, construction of nearby pathways, construction of the creek construction. foot bridge) and on the undeveloped DHPA parcel to verify that no special species are located in the area proposed for park expansion. Regulatory permits shall be obtained as necessary from the Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, or State Water Resources Control Board as necessary, and in conjunction with the recommendations of the biolo ical re ort. Mitigation Measure 3: As detailed engineering is developed for the Ongoing through PL and PCS PL design of the footings for the pedestrian footbridge over Dublin Creek as agency envisioned in the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, the City shall approval. work with the appropriate regulatory agencies to ensure that impacts to the creek are minimized and addressed to the satisfaction of the a enc . Mitigation Measure 4: In High Archeological Probability Areas(including Ongoing through PL and PCS PL a 150 meter (493 foot) corridor centered on Dublin Creek and within the ground eneral vicinit of S1. Ra mond's Church, Pioneer Cemete ,and the disturbance Mitigation Measure Dublin Square Shopping Center site), the permitting of future ground disturbance shall include provisions for further archival and field study by an archeologist, archeological testing and, if necessary, archeological monitorin durin construction. Mitigation Measure 5: Should preconstruction excavation or borings be conducted outside of the High Archeological Probability Areas, but within the project area, a qualified archeologist shall monitor the work to define the presence or absence of buried resources in order to promote advance lannin for miti ation ur oses. Mitigation Measure 6: If a Native American artifact or human remains are identified during any demolition or construction in the project area, work on the project shall cease immediately until those steps outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e) can be taken to the satisfaction of the Dublin Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in compliance with the requirements of Section 15064.5 (e). Additionally, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code (relating to the discove of Native American remains should be im lemented. Mitigation Measure 7: If an archeological, prehistoric, or paleontological resource is discovered during any demolition or construction in the project area, work on the project shall cease immediately until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (ij is prepared by a qualified archeologist and approved by the Dublin Community Development Director. Project work may be resumed in com Iiance with such plan. Mitigation Measure 8: Future roadwork or subsurface construction and maintenance within the Donlon Way road right of way and the portion of Dublin Boulevard within the project area shall include protocol for inadvertent discoveries made during construction, including the development of a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (ij, prepared by a qualified archeologist and approved by the Dublin Public Works and Community Development Directors. In the event of a discovery, project work may be resumed in com Iiance with such plan. . One time or On oin and/or construction Responsible for Responsible 1m lementation Verificatiol Ongoing through PL and PCS PL ground disturbance and/or construction Ongoing through PL and PCS PL ground disturbance and/or construction Ongoing through PL ground disturbance and/or construction PL Ongoing through PW ground disturbance and/or construction PL . . . Mitigation Measure One time or Responsible for ResponsiblE Ongoing Implementation Verificatic Mitigation Measure 9: A site-specific soils reportlgeotechincal One time for Building PL investigation shall be required for any development proposal in the project each new area and shall be conducted by a California-registered geologist or a development California-registered engineering geologist. The report shall address the proposal potential for expansive soils and ground liquefaction. Specific measures to reduce seismic hazards, expansive soils, and liquefaction hazards to a less than significant level shall be included in the report and those . measures shall be implemented as part of the site development. Mitigation Measure 10: Prior to demolition of any building in the project One time for Building, Building, PL area, the building shall be sampled to determine if the building contains each building BAAQMD lead paint and/or asbestos. If either of the materials are determined to be proposed to be present, they shall be handles and disposed of as a hazardous material demolished and in compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations _7 1_ CITY OF DUBLIN . 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 94568 Website: http://www.cLdublin.ca.us Mil. lGA TEDNEG A liVE 8,;ECLARAT'I.'..... . ... " -,---- -- .,.... .. .. Project Title: PA # 02-074 Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment, Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning Project Description: The City of Dublin has prepared several documents that will guide the planning for future public and private development in City's historic core. These documents include the Draft Dublin Village Historic Area Specific Plan and related General Plan Amendment, the Draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2006 Update, the Dublin Historic Park Draft Master Plan, and the Dublin Village Historic Area Rezoning. This Initial Study examines the potential environmental impacts of implementing these documents, collectively referred to as the proposed project. Project Location: Applicant: Determination: Approximately 38 acres surrounding the intersection of Donlon Way and Dublin Boulevard. Specifically, Assessor Parcel Numbers 941-1560-009-01, 941-1560-007-01, 941-0113-003- 01, 941-0113-154, 941-0040-006-16, 941-1550-004, 941-1550-005-02, 941-1550-003-02, 941-1550-001-12,941-1550-001-02, 941-1560-001-01, 941-1560-002-02, 941-0040-006- . 10,941-1560-003-04,941-1560-001-02, 941-1560-006, 941-1560-005, 941-1560-003-03, 941-1550-002-02, and 941-1550-001-10. City of Dublin, 100 Civic Pla2;a, Dublin, CA 94568 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. ~?--> v..--- Kristi B scorn, Senior Planner fly jU?&J-h Date A copy of the Initial Study documenting the reasons to support the above finding is available at the City of Dublin, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, or by calling (925) 833-6610. Date NOI Mailed: Date Posted: Date Published: Comment Period: Considered by: On: N.O.D. filed: City Council Resolution No. May 26, 2006 May 26, 2006 May 31,2006 May 31, 2006 - June 30, 2006 Dublin City Council August 1, 2006 August 4,2006 148-06 .