The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About8.1 Attch 8 Exh A DraftReso&Neg Declaration RESOLUTION NO. xx-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USE OF LAND) TO ALLOW MINI-STORAGE AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE M-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT AND CHAPTER 8.28 (INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS) TO IDENTIFY THE M-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT AS CONSISTENT WITH THE BUSINESS PARK/INDUSTRIAL AND OUTDOOR STORAGE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 8,160 SQUARE FOOT MINI-STORAGE BUILDING AND THE CONVERSION OF 4,650 SQUARE FEET OF AN EXISTING WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO MINI-STORAGE USES AT DUBLIN SECURITY STORAGE CITY-WIDE 6005/6015 SCARLETT COURT (APN 941-0550-033 & 941-0550-034) PLPA 2010-00005 & PLPA-2010-00006 WHEREAS, Glenn Kierstead, property owner and business owner of Dublin Security Storage located at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court has requested a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the requested amendments would also have the effect of permitting Mini- Storage uses in PD (Planned Development) Zoning Districts that allow M-1 (Light Industrial) uses; and WHEREAS, Staff is also recommending a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 8.28.020.6.4 (General Plan Consistency) to identify the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as being consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use; and WHEREAS, Mr. Kierstead has also requested approval of a Site Development Review to construct a new 8,160 square foot mini-storage building and to convert 4,650 square feet of an existing warehouse building to mini-storage uses at Dublin Security Storage (the "ProjecY'); and WHEREAS, the Project is located in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and has a General Plan Land Use designation of Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State Guidelines and City Environmental Regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the CEQA, an Initial Study/Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Project and was circulated for public review from October 2, 2010 to October 22, 2010; and WHEREAS, no comments were received on the Negative Declaration during the public review period; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted to the City of Dublin Planning Commission on November 9, 2010 recommending City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration to allow Mini- EXHIBIT A TO ATTACHMENT 8 Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and comparable PD (Planned Development) Zoning Districts and to identify the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use designation; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report submitted to the City of Dublin Planning Commission also recommended approval of a Site Development Review to construct a new 8,160 square foot mini-storage building and to convert 4,650 square feet of an existing warehouse building to mini- storage uses at Dublin Security Storage; and WHEREAS, any Site Development Review approval will be contingent upon City Council approval of the proposed Negative Declaration and Zoning Ordinance Amendments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on November 9, 2010 and adopted a Resolution recommending City Council adoption of the Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted to the City of Dublin City Council on December 7, 2010 recommending City Council adoption of a Negative Declaration to allow Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and comparable PD (Planned Development) Zoning Districts and to identify the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use designation; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider the proposed Negative Declaration, all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgment to evaluate the project. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby adopt the Negative Declaration for the Dublin Security Storage Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Site Development Review attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this _ day of 2010, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk G:IPA#120101PLPA-2010-00006 Dublin Security Storage Rez_SDRIPC 11.09.1014tt 8 Draft CC Reso Neg Dec Final.doc 2of2 OF DpB~ i9~ ~az CITY OF DUBLIN ~`ILIFOR~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Title: PLPA-2010-00006 Dublin Security Storage Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Site Development Review Project Description: The project proposes amendments to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance to identify the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use and to allow Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. The project also includes Site Development Review for the expansion of Dublin Security Storage, an existing mini- storage facility. The expansion includes the construction of an 8,160. square foot mini-storage building and the conversion of 4,650 square feet of an existing 8,600 square foot building for mini-storage uses. Dublin Security Storage is located at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court. Project Location: 6005/6015 Scarlett Court, M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning Districts Citywide and PD (Planned Development) Zoning Districts with underlying M-1 uses Citywide Name of Proponent: City of Dublin Attn: Marnie R. Waffle, Senior Planner Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin CA 94568 - Determination: I hereby find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore a NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared. Jeri Ra , AICP, Community Development Director Date Copies of the Initial Study documenting the reasons to support the above finding are available at the City of Dublin, Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, or by calling (925) 833-6610. Date Published: Date Posted: Date Notice.Mailed: Considered by: On: N.O.D. filed: Council Resolution Na Page 1 of 25 l1I ~ 1 ~ 19 82 ~~LIFO~~~ Dublin Security Storage Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Site Development Review Initial Study/Negative Declaration Planning Application PLPA-2010-00006 Lead Agency City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 September 2010 Page 2 of 25 TABLE OF CONTENTS Environmental Checklist Form - Initial Study 4 Project Description 5 Figure 1: Dublin General Plan Land Use Map 7 Figure 2: Dublin Zoning Map 8 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 9 Environmental Determination 10 Environmental Impacts 11 Assessment of Environmental Impacts 12 Aesthetics 12 Agricultural Resources 13 Air Quality 13 Biological Resources 14 Cultural Resources 15 Geology and Soils 16 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 17 Hydrology and Water Quality 18 Land Use and Planning 20 Mineral Resources 20 Noise 21 Population and Housing............................................................................................ 22 Public Services 22 Recreation 23 Transportation and Traffic 23 Utility and Services Systems 24 Mandatory Findings of Significance 25 Page 3 of 25 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: Dublin Security Storage Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Site Development Review 2. Lead Agency Name/Address: City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 3. Contact Person/Phone Number: Marnie R. Waffle, Senior Planner City of Dublin Community Development Department (925) 833-6610 4. Project Location: 6005/6015 Scarlett Court Citywide, M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning Districts Citywide, PD (Planned Development Zoning Districts with underlying M-1 uses) 5. Project Sponsor's Name/Address: City of Dublin Community Development Department 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 6. General Plan Designation: Business Park/Industrial & Outdoor Storage Business Park/Industrial Industrial Park 7. Zoning: Citywide, M-1 (Light Industrial) Citywide, PD (Planned Development with underlying M-1 uses) 8. Surrounding land uses and setting: Various, Citywide 9. Public Agency Required Approvals: None _.a_._...._....~,~ . . _ w..._._... _ . , Page 4 of 25 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project proposes amendments to the Dublin Zoning Ordinance to identify the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use and to allow Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. The project also includes Site Development Review for the expansion of Dublin Security Storage, an existing mini-storage facility. The expansion includes the construction of an 8,160 square foot mini-storage building and the conversion of 4,650 square feet of an existing 8,600 square foot building for mini-storage uses. Dublin Security Storage is located at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court. Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Stora4e General Plan Land Use The Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage Land Use is located within the Primary Planning Area (see Figure 1). The Dublin General Plan defines Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage as inclusive of Business Park/Industrial uses which include non-retail businesses that do not involve heavy trucking or generate nuisances due to emissions, noise or open uses. Floor area ratios range from .30-.40 and include areas such as Clark Avenue and Sierra Court. Residential uses are not permitted within the Business Park/Industrial land use. In addition to Business Park/Industrial Uses, the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage land use allows for retail and manufacturing activities that are conducted outdoors such as mobile home or construction materials storage and includes areas such as Scarlett Court. Floor area ratios range from .25-.40. According to the General Plan Land Use Map, the Scarlett Court area and the south side of Houston Place are designated as Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage; no other areas of the City currently have this designation. The Scarlett Court area is zoned M-1 (Light Industrial) and the south side of Houston Place is zoned PD (Planned Development) with underlying C-2 (General Commercial) and M-1 (Light Industrial) uses. The Dublin Zoning Ordinance identifies consistency between General Plan land uses and zoning districts. The M-1 zoning district is consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Industrial Park land uses. No mention is made of Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 1: Amend Chapter 8.28 (Industrial Zoning Districts) to include Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage as consistent with the M-1 Zoning District (Section 8.28.020.B.4). M-1 (Liqht Industrial) Zoninq District Mini-Storage is currently a permitted use in the C-2 (General Commercial) Zoning District and is defined in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance as follows, The term Mini-Storage shall mean storage or warehousing service within a building(s) primarily for individuals to store personal effects and by businesses to store materials for operation of an industrial or commercial enterprise located elsewhere. Incidental uses in a mini-storage may include the repair and maintenance of materials stored by the tenant but in no case may storage spaces in . _ _ ___......_,..~.~__.p__.~~._.___ Page 5 of 25 a Mini-Storage facility function as an independent retail, wholesale, business or service use. Mini-Storage was a permitted use in the M-1 district under the, Alameda County Zoning Ordinance which the City of Dublin adopted upon incorporation in 1982. In 1997, the Zoning Ordinance underwent a wholesale revision and it is presumed that at that time Mini-Storage was eliminated as a permitted use in the M-1 district. Two mini-storage facilities were established in the M-1 district prior to the 1997 Zoning Ordinance revisions and continue to operate today. These mini-storage facilities are located at 6265 Scarlett Court (U-Haul) and 6005/6015 Scarlett Court (Dublin Security Storage). The Zoning Ordinance is proposed to be amended to allow Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 district. This would allow Dublin Security Storage to expand their existing facility as described above and also has the potential to allow for the future development of Mini-Storage in other M-1 districts throughout the City. Mini-storage facilities are typically one-story, sometimes two-story, but future development would be limited by the 45-foot maximum height standard in the M-1 district. Mini-storage facilities tend to be low-intensity uses with few employees. Large-truck traffic or regular commercial deliveries would not typically be expected. Currently, the City of Dublin has three M-1 zoning district areas: Scarlett Court, Sierra Court and a parcel of land located at 11711 Dublin Blvd. Some PD (Planned Development) zoning districts may also have an underlying M-1 zoning designation. One such district is located along Dougherty Road and includes Houston Place (See Figure 2). The M-1 district permits a range of light industrial uses such as research and development labs, trucking terminals, and warehousing and distribution. All of the M-1 and PD districts affected by the proposed amendment already permit light industrial uses. All new uses in the affected districts also require Site Development Review and related site-specific environmental review. All of the aforementioned areas which have an M-1 zoning designation are currently developed and not anticipated to redevelop in the near future. However, the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment would allow for Mini-Storage uses to be established in these areas should redevelopment occur. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2: Amend Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) to add Mini-Storage (Use Type) as a permitted use in the M-1 zoning district (Section 8.12.050 Commercial Use Types). Site Development Review The project also includes the expansion of an existing mini-storage facility. The applicant, Dublin Security Storage, is proposing to construct an 8,160 square foot mini-storage building and convert 4,650 square feet of an existing 8,600 square foot building for mini-storage use at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court. The site is located within an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and has a General Plan Land Use of Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage. The proposed project complies with all applicable development standards for the M-1 district, including height, parking landscaping, etc. Any Site Development Review approval to expand the existing mini-storage use is contingent upon approval of the Zoning Ordinance Amendments described above to identify the M-1 zoning district as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use and to allow mini-storage as a permitted use in the M-1 zoning district. .a. ...,_...r _ . r....._...~ _ Page 6 of 25 FIGURE 1. DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP D U B L 1 N G E N E R A L P L A N (Figure 1-lai ~ L A N D U S E M A P as amenOed ihrough January, 2010 - . \ r IW~~~ 4M~N IWVYp Mu . . . " . . - r nbbvs.-ftlww«,lpac. cannwmvu.&avid wd.N" PWm.gAwurms w0..~w+:y.r..arro~•uyy ~Wrora ~ M~i~ ~r`;~.~„ra..~:r - ~o..y~rr.arpo.ae~yy ~'•+r~„c~,;r, ~s^~+~.,~.ey~.~.a` ~,:,~b,pti^iar.+nP~.u~/~l C~lw...u `r i~- ~ ~rr',-...~'~ - ~t~ ~M+.w+h+ ~~inI~J.Gr.~Yti•r.ir~,.~ aoyq t,:Val.yh„bAetle,a ~~,.-s;. ioi ~ ~~i..rw4*+rd ~~y.o.~4rara'rRa~•~VV•q Wt~ prra~Ttii"ste tr~... tsi '.--••••r-. ~qr,r,.yly,o,w.e.r...+.rwoc» p~y ~~ie`R'n`aucs 4...~++ .p.... ' Page 7 of 25 FIGURE 2. DUBLIN ZONING MAP W; DUBLIN ZONING MAP 1--~-- af amendeA tAreuqh March li, 2008 ~ IMand6 ..j i i ~W . INY/&*b1 Ce1nam-Y1 IqAush4I TIPMy RWpp J11rWLUUM BCllftries 4MaAO`e k.I Osftk#~u~ CO _ Or~oMnYM1v M! _ Y.lwsYM ~r~?cp ~ R: _ l~wwt/Artl:V^i^~ C.M - Wy'NU'I.plLbwbnM' ~I.1 _ LyiIfDNYIN ~ ~ala~ bl~lorn x4 L::3 Gl _ MWCeen. F.) _ IwwyliWnNM RM _ MJP-~~e11~'11u1NaYM C-l f iu/CawnaiM O i4Y0Ynytim••.. ~~fG\ue~IfafAaf _ ~?~m~n1~ Page 8 of 25 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 ImpacY' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. - Aesthetics - Agricultural Resources - Air Quality - Biological Resources - Cultural Resources - Geology/Soils - Hazards and - Hydrology/Water - Land Use/ Planning Hazardous Materials Quality - Mineral Resources - Noise - Population/Housing - Public Services - Recreation - Transportation/ Circulation - Utilities/Service - Mandatory Findings of - S stems Si nificance . . . _ . _ . ~ . . . . _ . , . . .V,e__.... Page 9 of 25 1 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the X environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. v(Y1oA,Y~'k l34k-SL 10.01.10 Signature Date MQYhi-e. 1. V\la-~-~L~ ci+y o~ "Dt,lbliyl Printed name For ._.4~__. . _:_.:.._..e . . ..r . Page 10 of 25 ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS This assessment of environmental impacts assesses the potential impacts of the Zoning Ordinance Amendments to identify the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use and to allow Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and the Site Development Review for the construction of an 8,160 square foot mini-storage building and the conversion of 4,650 square feet of an existing 8,600 square foot building for mini-storage uses, in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts include the following: 1) City of Dublin General Plan, adopted February 11, 1985 (updated to January 19, 2010) 2) City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance, adopted September 2, 1997 3) Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy, adopted January 4, 2006. 4) Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 8th Edition. Copies of all the documents referenced above are available for public review at the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568. _ .r.._. __.._r_ . _ ...............M Page 11 of 25 1 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic X vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock X outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its X surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime X views in the area? a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact on a scenic vista. While the Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future development in the M-1 zoning district, portions of which are located adjacent to Interstate 580 which is a designated scenic corridor, all of the affected districts are developed sites in developed areas and future development would be subject to the M-1 district 45-foot height limit. With so few sites affected by the amendment and with the applicable height limit, any potential effects would be less than significant. The expansion of the existing mini-storage facility at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court is adjacent to Interstate 580 but will not obstruct views of scenic vistas. The site is fully developed and the construction of a new 8,160 square foot mini-storage building will not be readily visible from any public right-of-way. b) No Impact. The project will have no impact to scenic resources. The affected sites are all developed and the General Plan identifies no sensitive resources on the sites. The expansion of the existing mini-storage facility at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court is located on a fully developed site where no scenic resources are present. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact on the visual character and quality of the site and surroundings. While the Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future development of mini-storage facilities in the M-1 zoning district, all of the affected sites are already developed, located in developed areas and already permit other light industrial uses. Compliance with applicable development standards, such as setbacks, building height and landscaping will be evaluated through future Site Development Review and related project-specific environmental review to ensure that any future development of mini-storage facilities will be attractive and compatible with surrounding uses. The expansion of the existing mini-storage facility at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will include the construction of a new 8,160 square foot building that complies with all applicable M-1 development standards and will have a less than significant impact on the visual character and quality of the site and surroundings. The building will be designed with colors and materials that are consistent with other buildings on the site and will be centrally located on the site and not readily visible from surrounding properties. Page 12 of 25 d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not create a significant new source of light or glare as M-1 sites in the City are developed and already subject to urban level light and glare. Future development of mini-storage uses in the M-1 zoning district will require project-specific environmental review; however, impacts are not anticipated as no special high-intensity lighting is required beyond current security lighting regulations and the storage buildings usually do not have windows and thus would not be a source of increased nighttime light and glare. The expansion of the existing mini-storage facility at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will include exterior wall mounted lighting in accordance with the City of Dublin Non-Residential Security Ordinance and will be glare shielded and oriented towards the ground. This will ensure that any new sources of light will not cause any spillover onto adjacent properties. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the X Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, X or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or X nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? a-c) No Impact. The project will have no impact to agricultural resources. There is no farmland, agricultural uses or Williamson Act contracts within any of the M-1 zoning districts. All properties within the M-1 district are fully developed with non-agricultural uses and do not contain any farmland. Surrounding sites are also largely developed with a variety of uses none of which are agricultural or contain farmland. III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air X quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the X project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality Page 13 of 25 1 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact ' Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial X pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? a-c) No Impact. The project will have no impact to air quality. The affected M-1 and PD districts already allow development. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future mini-storage development in those districts. The facilities are low intensity uses with low traffic generation and little or no pollutant emissions from the facilities• themselves. All future development of mini-storage uses in the M-1 and PD districts will require Site Development Review and related project-specific environmental review. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court is consistent with the Dublin General Plan Land Use of Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage and the adopted Floor Area Ratios for this land use. The expansion will generate significantly less vehicular trips (2.50 daily trips per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area) than if the site were developed with light industrial uses (6.97 daily trips per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area). d-e) No 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 includes residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, hospitals and medical clinics; none of these sensitive uses are on or adjacent to the affected sites. Mini-storage facilities would not create objectionable odors. This project involves the expansion of an existing mini-storage facility in a light industrial zoning district where there are no sensitive receptor population groups nor would the project create objectionable odors. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, X or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or 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, X policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Page 14 of 25 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited X 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 X 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 a tree X preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community X Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a-d) No Impact. The project will have no impact to biological resources. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future development of mini-storage facilities in the M-1 district but do not approve any specific development. All future development of mini-storage uses in the M-1 and PD districts will require Site Development Review and related project-specific environmental review; however, no impacts would be anticipated as no sensitive biological resources currently exist on the affected sites. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will occur on a fully developed site within a light industrial zoning district where no wildlife species, wetlands or other biological resources exist. e-fl No Impact. The project is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and other adopted policies related to preseroation and protection of biological resources. The City has no adopted habitat conservation plans. There are no protected trees present within the project site. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in X § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource X pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique .a.,____ _ . ..._.F..._ . Page 15 of 25 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact ' Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those X interred outside of formal cemeteries? a-d) No Impact. The project will have no impact to cultural resources. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future development of mini-storage facilities in the M-1 and some PD districts. The affected sites are developed and have already been subject to ground disturbance. All future development of mini-storage uses in the M-1 and PD districts will require Site Development Review and related project-specific environmental review. Public Works standard conditions of approval include procedures to be followed if unexpected cultural resources are discovered during excavation. Under these circumstances, no cultural resources impacts will occur. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will occur on a fully developed site that has no historic structures and no known archaeological or paleontological resources. The project will comply with the Conservation Element of the Dublin General Plan and Dublin Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.48 (Archaeological Resources Regulations). VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other X substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including X liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the projecf, and potentially result in on- X or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code X (1994), creating substantial risks to life or Page 16 of 25 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water X disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? a-d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact on geology and soils. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments will allow for the future development of mini-storage uses within the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and some PD districts in a region that is susceptible to rupture of earthquake faults, seismic ground shaking, seismic related ground failure and landslides. The Seismic Safety Element of the Dublin General Plan addresses impacts related to ground shaking, ground rupture, and soil based hazards. One of the guiding policies of this Element states that, "geologic hazards shall be mitigated or development shall be located away from geological hazards in order to preserve life, and protect property". All of the affected sites are developed and located in developed areas. None are located in an Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly Alquist Priolo Zone) and all construction would be subject to state building codes. Adherence to the Seismic Safety Element will result in a less than significant impact. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will adhere to the Seismic Safety Element of the Dublin General Plan resulting in a less than significant impact. All project construction will adhere to the Building Codes in effect at the time of permit issuance including seismic safety resulting in a less than significant impact. e) No Impact. The project is served by public sewer and water therefore the use of septic systems or alternative wastewater disposal systems will not be utilized. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the ro'ect: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, X or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable X upset/accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or X 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 compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a X result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Page 17 of 25 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation 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 X public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? fl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety X hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or X 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 X urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a-h) No Impact. The project will have no impact related to hazards or hazardous materials as these materials or substances would not typically be used in a mini-storage facility. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future mini-storage development in the M-1 and some PD districts; all such development would be subject to existing height regulations and M-1 perFormance standards limiting explosive materials, contaminants and other hazards. Given the nature of the mini-storage use and compliance with existing regulations, the amendments would not create hazards or hazardous materials impacts. The expansion mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court is not within an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of a private airstrip. The site is not located near any wildlands and therefore will not interFere with any emergency evacuation plans and will not create any risk of wildland fires. VII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the ro'ect: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Violate any water quality standards or waste X 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 X table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern X _ . . . _ . . . ~ _ . . _ . . Page 18 of 25 • Y Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or X substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm X water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? fl Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard X Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood X flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, X including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving inundation by X seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? a-f) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will have a less than significant impact on hydrology and water quality. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future mini-storage development in the M-1 and some PD districts; the affected sites are developed, in developed areas with existing public water and storm drainage facilities. Mini-storage facilities are not high demand water users and any future development would be subject to Public Works standards for drainage. The affected sites are relatively flat so any future development would not be expected to create soil erosion. Future re-development on existing developed sites would not be expected to increase runoff. Like any future mini-storage development, the expansion of mini- storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will conform 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. Additionally, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required, listing Best Management Practices which reduce the potential for water quality degradation during construction and post construction activities. Page 19 of 25 1 g) No Impact. The project is limited to allowing Mini-Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and PD districts allowing M-1 uses, and allowing the expansion of an existing mini-storage facility. Housing is not permitted in the M-1 district. h) Less Than Significant Impact. Based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps portions of the M-1 district are located within a designated 100-year flood hazard area and would be subject to building code requirements to raise the sites abaove flood levels. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will conform to all local building codes including raising the finish floor by 1-foot above flood level. i-j) No Impact. Compliance with building codes will ensure no flooding impacts. There are no large bodies of water on or near the affected sites that would cause seiche hazards; all of the sites are inland and relatively flat and would not be affected by tsunami or mudflow. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Physically divide an established community? X 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, local coastal X program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation X plan or natural community conservation plan? a-c) No Impact. The project will have no impact to land use and planning. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments will allow for the establishment of mini-storage uses in the. M-1 district where mini-storage has historically been a permitted use and in some PD districts. The ame.ndments are consistent with General Plan land use designations and industrial development policies. The City has no adopted habitat conservation plans. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will occur on a site where mini-storage was established as a permitted use and has operated with no adverse impacts to land use or planning. X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the X region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site X delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Page 20 of 25 a-b) No Impact. The project will have no impact to mineral resources as there are no mineral resource sites in the City. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will occur on a developed site and the construction of the new building will be located within a paved area currently utilized for vehicle storage. XI. NOISE. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local X general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Expose persons to or generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise X levels? c) Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above X levels existing without the project? d) Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project X vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or X public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? fl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing X or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a-fl No Impact. The project will not expose persons to noise levels in excess of noise standards adopted in the Noise Element of the Dublin Genera Plan or create excessive noise levels. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments will not result in an increase in ambient noise levels and will not impact any property located within an airport land use plan or near a private airstrip. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future development of mini-storage facitities in the M-1 and some PD districts but such uses are typically low intensity and do not involve high construction, traffic, operational or other noise generation. Any future mini-storage development would also be subject to the City's noise standards. The expansion of mini-storage uses will not expose persons to noise levels in excess of noise standards adopted in the Noise Element of the Dublin Genera Plan or create excessive noise levels. Noise related to construction of the new building will be negligible and temporary. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or near a private airstrip. Page 21 of 25 1 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for X example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement X housing elsewhere? a-c) No Impact. The project will have no impacts to population or housing. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments are limited to identifying the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District as consistent with the Business Park/Industrial,and Outdoor Storage General Plan Land Use and allowing Mini- Storage as a permitted use in the M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Residential uses are not permitted in the Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage land use and none are currently located within the areas designated for Business Park/Industrial and Outdoor Storage. While the Zoning Ordinance Amendments create the potential for future development of mini-storage facilities in the M-1 district, all of the sites are already designated for development and served by public utilities and services. As such, the amendments would not induce growth in areas not planned for development. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will not induce substantial population growth or displace existing housing or people. The project site is developed with existing mini-storage uses. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? X Police Protection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other Public Facilities? X . . , . _ _._,w. Page 22 of 25 a) No Impact. The project will have no impacts to public services. The affected sites are in urban developed areas currently served by public services and utilities. New development of mini- storage facilities pursuant to the amendments would be subject to payment of the City's Public Facilities Fees, as applicable. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 3005/6015 Scarlett Court will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or any other public facility. XIV. RECREATION. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial X physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of X recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a-b) No Impact. The project will have no impacts to recreation. The affected sites are planned for development in the General Plan and future development would be subject to applicable Public Facilities Fees for the provision of parks and recreational facilities. The expansion of mini- storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will not increase the use of existing parks or recreational facilities or require the construction of additional recreational facilities. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial X 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 X coun4y 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 X change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous X intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm . „ . _ . _...A . M_. _ . _ _ Page 23 of 25 1 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X fl Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation X (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? a-g) No Impact. The project will have no impacts to transportation or traffic. All of the affected sites are currently planned for light industrial uses that would have been assumed in the City's transportation planning and subject to Traffic Impact Fees, as appropriate. Like future mini- storage development, the expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court is negligible, generating significantly less vehicular trips (2.50 daily trips per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area) than if the site were developed with light industrial uses (6.97 daily trips per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area). VI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the ro'ect: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control X Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction X of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of X existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and X 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 X the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? fl Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the projecYs solid X waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X _.m._, . . . _ n _ .,..n.._. Page 24 of 25 a-g) No Impact. The project will have no impact to utilities or service systems. The affected sites are already planned for development and receive public water and sewer service from the Dublin San Ramon Services District. Mini-storage facilities are low intensity uses with minimal water demand and wastewater generation; future development of such uses would not be anticipated to cause water demand or wastewater generation beyond that projected in utility planning. New development of mini-storage facilities would be subject to Public Facilities Fees, as applicable. The expansion of mini-storage uses at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will not adversely affect water supplies, wastewater treatment capacity or landfill capacity and will comply with all regulations related to solid waste. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact with Impact Miti ation 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 X plant or animal community, reduce the 'number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project X are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on X human beings, either directly or indirectly? a) No Impact. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on biological, cultural or historical resources. b) No Impact. All of the affected sites are already planned for urban level development of light industrial uses. The amendments affect relatively few sites in Dublin, and with low intensity of mini-storage uses, are not expected to result in cumulatively considerable impacts. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project at 6005/6015 Scarlett Court will not have a significant adverse impact, individually or cumulatively. c) No Impact. Based on the preceding Initial Study, no substantial adverse effects to human beings, either directly or indirectly have been identified. . _ r.. R.. -...,._wW.. Page 25 of 25 1